The Legislative Council Environment and Planning Committee has commenced an inquiry into ecosystem decline in Victoria that will look at measures to restore habitats and populations of threatened and endangered species. The submission closing date is Friday, 31 July 2020. Consider pointing out the impact of human population growth and infrastructure expansion. The Committee is inviting community input to the inquiry, with terms of reference that include: · the extent of the decline of Victoria’s biodiversity and the likely impact on people and ecosystems · the adequacy of the legislative framework protecting Victoria’s environment and ecosystems, particularly in the context of climate change impacts · the adequacy and effectiveness of government programs · opportunities to restore the environment while upholding First Peoples’ connection to country. “We want to hear from people with expertise in these issues, but we also want to ensure that community members with direct knowledge of ecosystem decline in their local areas can contribute their views and suggestions to us,” Committee Chair Cesar Melhem said. “It’s important that we hear from communities across Victoria so that the Committee gets a complete picture of what’s happening to the state’s diverse ecosystems and what actions are needed to restore those under threat or in decline,” Mr Melhem said. Ecosystem decline can include catchment salinity, vegetation decline, weed proliferation, invasion of pest animals and stream decline. Submissions to the inquiry are welcome until 31 July 2020. Details on how to make a submission are available from the Committee’s website. “At a time when we are focusing on the health of our population, we think it’s also timely to look into the health of our ecosystems and the diverse species that populate our rich environment,” Mr Melhem said. Issued: 6 May 2020

The impact of the bushfires on Australia's communities, precious wildlife and their habitat is difficult to fathom. Across the country, it is estimated that more than 500 million animals, including critically endangered species, have already perished in the fires. The full impact is impossible to determine at this early stage. Zoos Victoria has been directed by the Victorian Government's Department of Environment, Land, Water and Planning (DELWP) to provide frontline veterinary support and long-term care to the wildlife affected by the bushfires. [Candobetter dot net Editor: Readers please also note that DELWP have declared open-season all year round on Victoria's kangaroos, and that their planning section is driving the population growth that is destroying wildlife habitat.]

Zoos Victoria says: "We have vets stationed on the frontline in East Gippsland who are beginning the enormous role of triaging and caring for animals that have survived the fires.

This is why we need urgent help from all our members.

We have established a Bushfire Emergency Wildlife Fund with 100% of donations going towards the impacted animals, including endangered species, to provide veterinary support, and to explore long-term solutions such as supplementary feeding and habitat restoration. The money raised from this fund will be distributed in conjunction with DEWLP, Parks Victoria and other wildlife recovery teams.

If you can, please make a tax-deductible donation to the Bushfire Emergency Wildlife Fund

Donate now

From the ashes, there are always signs of hope for our wildlife."

On behalf of Zoos Victoria
Dr Jenny Gray
CEO Zoos Victoria

Snap Action Against Minister's North East Link Decision

 

Planning Minister goes against own Planning Panel’s Advice to accept North East Link project as is

Joint Press Release: Friends of the Earth & Friends of Banyule

Thursday 5th December 2019

Environmental organisation Friends of the Earth and community group Friends of Banyule have expressed their extreme disappointment at today’s announcement that the Planning Minister Richard Wynne has approved the North East Link.

The project has been approved without extending the tunnel northwards, contrary to the Minister’s own Environmental Effects Statement Planning Panel’s advice and pleas of impacted families and community groups.

In the decision, Minister Wynne stated that “the project will produce significant environmental impacts, borne largely by the community of Melbourne’s northeast during a protracted construction period”.

Minister Wynne fails to report the permanent nature of this environmental and social damage and the long-term health impacts for those living along the 29km construction build, which includes 11 kindergartens, 12 schools and 5 aged care facilities.

“The State Labor Government values cars and toll road revenue over and above our children’s health and future. They are also prepared to destroy over 26,000 trees and two locals creeks, pollute the Yarra river and destroy the liveability of our beautiful green suburbs,” Friends of Banyule President Michelle stated.

“It's staggering that over 20 cherished homes in Yallambie will make way of the Tunnel Boring Machine Launch Site. This is additional to 37 homes already being acquired by the project. How many more homes in Watsonia and Greensborough will have to go via “voluntary acquisition” because they will simply be unliveable?”

“We don’t accept this greedy, undemocratic, sham consultation. The Minister has failed to listen to reasonable advice from his own expert Planning Panel and over 870 submissions by the public.”

The Minister admits that the project will produce ‘significant’ environmental impacts and lead to the destruction of valuable public open space. The project will impact as much as 175 hectares of open space during the 7 years construction period, with 18.2 hectares ‘required permanently’.

Friends of the Earth’s Sustainable Cities campaigner Claudia Gallois says “This will further entrench Melbourne’s reliance on cars for travel and have negative impacts on local communities and local business, increase greenhouse gas emissions and lead to the loss of valuable open space.”

“We welcome the state government’s investment in public transport, including the Metro Tunnel and Suburban Rail Link. But choosing a mega road over smart transport options like the Metro 2 tunnel is backwards thinking. Developing the North East Link will lock off development options for both Metro 2 and the long-promised Doncaster Rail Link, both of which are better ways of dealing with congestion on our roads, without destroying open space and damaging air quality”.

“In a rapidly growing city, it is simply not acceptable to be destroying public open space and sporting facilities.” (It's unfortunate that this media release doesn't challenge the idiocy of the Victorian Government encouraging further high immigration to this already overcrowded city (see LiveInMelbourne.vic.gov.au) - Ed.)

“There is no meaningful assessment of the rise of greenhouse gases associated with this project. In a time of climate change, this is unacceptable. It is also at odds with the government’s commitments under the Climate Change Act,” concluded Gallois.

Media Contacts:

Claudia Gallois, Friends of the Earth, 0448 752 656 [email protected]

Michelle Giovas, Friends of Banyule, 0409 179 121, [email protected]

If the Minister for Agriculture were to endorse at least one officer from each local council under the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act 1986 (POCTA) provisions (section 18), this would add at least 120 new animal welfare officers/inspectors to combat animal cruelty within their area. This would alleviate the workload of authorised enforcement agencies i.e.( RSPCA/VicPol) in the town or city in which an alleged offence has occurred. A section should also be added into POCTA as it was back in the 80’s before it was repealed, that half of the fines from a successful prosecution be paid to council and the other half to state revenue. This would also give council an incentive to work toward costs as RSPCA now do subsequently no out of pocket expenses.

In the past I have advocated for an Independent Office of Animal Welfare, but further research and forward thinking has changed my mind and I therefore submit the following suggestions regarding the above.

There are 120 municipalities in the state of Victoria, each have a local laws team that deal with animals including the Domestic Animals Act and other related acts of parliament. Some councils/shires may already have their officers endorsed under section 18 of POCTA to enforce and act under the provisions of POCTA.

From the 120 councils/shires each have officers that total at least 1 and some 12+ in the bigger councils and towns i.e. Shepparton, Bendigo, Ballarat, Geelong and Casey. Casey was the first to prosecute under POCTA new puppy farm sections successfully. If the Minister would endorse at least one officer from each council under POCTA provisions (section 18) that will at least give animal welfare 120 + new officers/inspectors to combat animal cruelty within the region of their area.

This would alleviate the workload of authorised enforcement agencies i.e.( RSPCA/VicPol) in the town or city in which an alleged offence has occurred. Plus a section should also be added (into POCTA) as it was back in the 80’s before it was repealed, that half of the fines from a successful prosecution be paid to council and the other half to state revenue. This would also give council an incentive to work toward costs as RSPCA now do subsequently no out of pocket expenses.

Training of these officers are on par with RSPCA inspector, rangers having the opportunity of courses offered prior to starting their occupation at council. Court and prosecutions would also be on par with RSPCA procedures.

RSPCA could then engage in their policies of supplying pet ambulance services, animal rescues, education and rehoming.
Sincerely,

Barrie R Tapp
Animal Cruelty Hotline Australia; Dipl. equine studies, Police academy det training; JP.

The recent announcement by the Victorian State government to ban native forest logging on public land in Eastern Victoria has been strongly welcomed by local environment groups including the Otway Ranges Environment Network(OREN) and Geelong Environment Council(GEC). Although the local communities of Eastern Victorian will need to go through a transition, claims of economic doom and gloom are unfounded. The logging phase out process to be completed by 2030 for Eastern Victoria is very similar to the process used to phase out native forest logging the Otway Ranges that successfully transitioned the local community and economy between 2002 and 2008.

“When the Otways logging ban was announced in 2002, wild claims were made that the Otways region would be economically devastated if native forest logging came to an end, that there would be mass unemployment” said Simon Birrell spokesperson for Otway Ranges Environment Network. “Claims were made that in Colac, where a number of hardwood sawmills were located, the town would die and that the Midway woodchip mill would close down. Instead nature based tourism has significantly expanded in the Otway region and this can easily be the case for Eastern Victoria.”

“For example, the Otway town of Forrest was founded on logging and had a sawmill mill that was phased out. It is now a hub for those who go mountain bike riding through the forests. Shops that were derelict when the local sawmill was operating have now been renovated and opened as a café. There are accommodation businesses. In another example, Otways logs once went to the Birregurra sawmill. Now many people who live in Birri work as part of the tourism service industries along the Great Ocean Road.”

“For the Otways there was six year transition between 2002 and 2008, for east of the State it will be a ten year transition to 2030. Claims the towns such as Orbost will die are rubbish. Orbost can easily be developed has a major gateway hub for nature based tourism to see the wonders of the tall forests and magnificent scenery the region of far East Gippsland has to offer. What needs to happen is investment in making the place more accessible for visitors and a marketing campaign to promote the wonders of the area so more visitors go.”

“It is concerning that Federal Government ministers were so quick to condemn the Eastern Victorian logging phase out. The Federal coalition government should note that the Victorian Liberal Party supported the Otway logging ban in 2005 and voted to support passage of legislation to ban logging and create the Great Otway National Park. Rather than irresponsibly talk up the negative, it is hoped both the State and Federal Liberal and National Parties will work in a bi-partisan way with the State Government to ensure a just and fair transition for the communities impacted by this decisions and jointly explore nature conservation tourism employment opportunities.”

“Finally, both OREN and GEC have recently been lobbying the State and Federal Governments to cancel the Regional Forest Agreement (RFA) that covers the Otways, given logging has already ended. We suspect that the requirement to renew the RFAs, by March next year, has prompted the State Government to announce this latest logging ban decision given there are also four RFAs that cover the East of the State and, if renewed, they would have guaranteed logging to the year 2040. This would have been irresponsible. All the RFAs need to be cancelled as they now all come into conflict with this new State Government policy to phase out native forest logging across Victoria by 2030.”

Campaspe Shire has introduced a great new horse welfare change to its Echuca and District Livestock Exchange. It will no longer accept horses that do not have clear origins and destinations. Let us hope that other shires will follow this example. As you may read in Horses need an identity urgently, Victorian laws are extremely irresponsible towards horses, and many horses suffer greatly in this state.

Echuca & District Livestock Exchange

Important notice

Echuca & District Livestock Exchange will no longer accept horses that are "on delivery"/ "depot horses"/ "in transit" / "on consignment".
- Effective 2 September 2019.

Echuca & District Livestock Exchange ("the facility") is a Council owned facility that is open to agents and private operators to utilise the Livestock Exchange under a formal User Agreement prepared in line wiht Council's accreditation under the National Saleyards Quality Assurance Program.

Council is committed to animal welfare, compliance, occupational health and safety - personal injury, biosecurity and the monitoring of livestock that move in and out of the facility.

Horses that are "on delivery"/"depot horses"/"in transit"/"on consignment" pose a serious biosecurity threat and disease outbreak risk to the facility and other livestock. There is no traceability or record of the horses' previous or outgoing locations, nor their previous or new owner's details. Council also has no control over the condition that the hores are in when delivered at the facility.

Therefore, as of 2 September 2019, Campaspe Shire Council will no longer accept these horses at the Echuca & District Livestock Exchange facility.

Council seeks your assistance to pass this advice on to all relevant parties involved in the supply chain of horses that may have dealings with hornses on delivery at the Echuca & District Livestock Exchange and advise alternative delivery arrangements will need to be made. This may include, but is not limited to, your staff, buyers, abattoirs, horse transport companies and vendors.

Please note that the Andrew Wilson & Co horse sales will continue as per usual and the staff will be strictly monitoring the condition of the horses included in the sales upon delivery to the facility.

Should you have any questions regarding this matter, please contact the Echuca & District Livestock Exchange Manager on 03 5482 2851, or alternativesly, Council's Commercial Operations Manager on 03 5481 2200.

Campaspe Shire Council
Cnr Hare & Heygart Streets
Echuca VIC 3564
PO Box 35 Echuca VIC 3565.

Tel: 1300 666 535 / 03 5481 2200
Email: [email protected]
Web: https://www.campaspe.vic.gov.au
ABN: 23 604 881 620

(Photos by Fiona Bell.) I have strongly supported the RUANELA (Residents United Against North East Link Option A) campaign against the North East Link. I am opposed to the removal of thousands of mature trees and the massive loss of open space particularly in the Koonung Creek Reserve. 12.7 hectares of parkland will be permanently lost.

I am opposed to the overkill which this project is - a 24 lane freeway at one point, rivalling the word's 26 lane widest at a massive cost of $16 billion, which could properly fund mental health, homelessness or indigenous disadvantage if it were directed there instead.
I am opposed to the impact on sporting and recreational pursuits for my constituents. The Boroondara Tennis Centre will go. The Freeway Public Gold Course will have holes removed, threatening its viability."

I am opposed to the way this project destroys the Doncaster Rail Project - for years residents have been promised this Project was on the drawing board.

I supported local residents and the City of Boroondara in a letter to the Transport Infrastructure Minister in March. I supported local residents in the speech I gave during debate on this project in the Legislative Council in May. I supported local residents in asking a Question in the House urging the Government to reconsider the Doncaster Rail Line in June.

And I will be raising this issue in the Legislative Council again today, urging the Government to reconsider Option A in the light of new modelling work commissioned by Councils.

For further information, or to support the campaign against the North East Link please don't hesitate to get in touch with my Electorate Office.

Your Sincerely,

Clifford Hayes M.L.C.

206-208 Bay Street North Brighton 3186

P (03) 95308399 E: [email protected]
https://www.cliffordhayes.com.au

"A hundred kangaroos, some dead, others badly injured." Barry Tapp, Senior Inspector for Animal Cruelty Australia Hotline, and other animal rescuers and carers say that the RSPCA failed to respond to requests to deploy the Mobile Animal Vet van to the bushfire areas where it was much needed (notably round Bunyip) and that they thereby failed to honour the commitment they gave the Victorian Government after the Victorian Parliamentary Inquiry into RSPCA Victoria. We publish below the Government Response to that Inquiry. Warriors4wildlife provided the photos via Barrie Tapp.

The Victorian Government Response to the Parliamentary Inquiry into the RSPCA Victoria

Overview

The Parliamentary Inquiry into the Royal Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals (RSPCA) Victoria was established in 2016. The Economy and Infrastructure Committee undertook a detailed investigation into the way that RSPCA Victoria used its powers pursuant to the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act 1986, and the use of State Government funding by RSPCA Victoria.
The Victorian Government thanks the Committee for its report following the Inquiry. It also acknowledges the important contributions made by all stakeholders who participated in the Inquiry.
The Committee found that many of the issues presented were historical. Over time, a number of these have been resolved through the improved operating environment between the Department of Economic Development, Jobs, Transport and Resources (DEDJTR) and RSPCA Victoria. In addition, RSPCA Victoria has responded to the 2016 Independent Review of the RSPCA Victoria Inspectorate and made substantial progress towards implementing the recommendations.

Response

Recommendation 1

That the Victorian Government and RSPCA Victoria provide more transparency, information, and detail with regard to the powers of RSPCA Victoria inspectors under the Prevention of
Cruelty to Animals Act 1986, and in the Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) between RSPCA Victoria and DEDJTR.

Government response: Support in full

The Victorian Government and RSPCA Victoria are collaborating in a number of areas to improve the transparency, and detail, of information available regarding the powers of RSPCA Victoria inspectors. Improved reporting systems between RSPCA Victoria and DEDJTR have already been adopted under the current Memorandum of Understanding (MoU). These changes will deliver further detail regarding the activities of the RSPCA Victoria Inspectorate, and the use of government funding.

DEDJTR along with RSPCA Victoria, are considering the best options for developing, and designing resources to communicate the responsibilities of each organisation more clearly. The information on DEDJTR and RSPCA Victoria websites will be clarified and simplified to provide consistent guidance to community members reporting cruelty, as well as informing the community of the roles of each organisation.

The Victorian Government’s Animal Welfare Action Plan contains commitments to review and clarify the enforcement roles of different authorised agencies, including RSPCA Victoria, as well as
governance and funding structures. Future arrangements between RSPCA Victoria and DEDJTR will provide increased transparency, information and detail with regard to the use of powers of RSPCA Victoria inspectors under the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act 1986 (POCTA Act).

Recommendation 2

That RSPCA Victoria ensure that it investigates cruelty to commercial animals in emergency situations only, in line with Division 2 of Part 2A of Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act 1986.

Government response: Support in full

The POCTA Act and the MoU between DEDJTR and RSPCA Victoria are clear regarding the requirement to provide services to alleviate animal pain and suffering. The current MoU defines the
roles and responsibilities for both organisations with respect to commercial and non-commercial animals. It also states that under emergency situations “all inspectors ... may be required to respond to animal welfare incidents outside their areas of responsibility ... if there is a need to alleviate pain and suffering”.

Development of new operational agreements between RSPCA Victoria and DEDJTR will take into account, and give careful consideration to, this recommendation, whilst also ensuring that animal
welfare is not disadvantaged in an emergency situation. DEDJTR and RSPCA Victoria will collaborate to develop resources to communicate the responsibilities of each organisation clearly. This will
include clarifying the role of RSPCA Australia Approved Farming Scheme Compliance Officers so they are clearly differentiated from RSPCA Victoria Inspectors.

Recommendation 3

That RSPCA Victoria in consultation with the Victorian Government, consider ways to improve engagement and collaboration with animal stakeholder organisations.

Government response: Support in full

DEDJTR and RSPCA Victoria are working to develop new strategies to improve the engagement and collaboration with, and amongst, animal stakeholder organisations.

The Animal Welfare Action Plan (AWAP) provides an example of this approach. Two of the key pillars within the AWAP are ‘Collaboration’ and ‘Education’. The former will enhance cooperation across government and animal sectors, while the latter will assist with communication and training that improves knowledge, skills and compliance.

RSPCA Victoria will continue implementation of its Stakeholder Engagement and Advocacy Strategy, which focuses on building engagement, trust and collaborating with a range of stakeholders.

Original publication Authorised by the Hon. Jaala Pulford MLC
Department of Economic Development, Jobs, Transport and Resources
1 Spring Street Melbourne Victoria 3000
Telephone (03) 9651 9999
Department of Economic Development, Jobs, Transport and Resources 2017

Wildlife carers and rescuers and local farmers have requested the RSPCA to provide its mobile vet clinic ready to assist the expected influx of injured and suffering animals as soon as people are allowed back into the areas currently affected by the Bunyip fire. Barrie Tapp, Senior Inspector for Animal Cruelty Australia Hotline, says the RSPCA and their mobile vet van are needed now. "We already have reports of animals dead and dying."

There will be a huge number of wildlife, domestic animals, horse and cattle, and other farm animals, in urgent need of medical care as soon as people are allowed back in. Will the RSPCA mobile vet clinic will be ready to assist? The RSPCA mobile vet would be an enormous help to manage the influx of injured and suffering animals requiring treatment. There will be many locals out there doing what we can to help, but there is a need for vets and experienced animal carers also to give professional guidance and provide the more serious medical treatments.

The RSPCA's experienced vets and medical staff will be desperately required to step in promptly and help in the aftermath of these fires. From a PR perspective, the RSPCA providing assistance in these fire ravaged areas would draw positive media attention. But far more importantly, they would be joining forces with other concerned individuals, and providing care to the affected animals who will be in desperate need of our help.

Barry Tapp, Senior Inspector for Animal Cruelty Hotline Australia, says that he sent emails yesterday to Terry Ness, chief inspector and to the Inspectorate RSPCA, and to Liz Walker CEO - but there has been no response! In his experience, the RSPCA did help, once, when he, Tapp and Animal Cruelty Hotline with Hugh Worth (RSPCA), Animal Liberation, Anil rescue Australia and Nigel's animal rescue delivered food and essentials all around.

Local farmers, Anne and David Serato have also sent an email to RSPCA Victoria, stating that they are horse and cattle owners, describing their concern about herds, horses and wildlife. They have requesting the RSPCA mobile vet to assist the wildlife rescuers once the burned areas are open, stating the need for expert back up in the form of RSPCA and skilled wildlife carers.

At around 5.28 pm Victorian time today 4 March 2019, Barrie Tapp received a response from Liz Walker, CEO of RSPCA Victoria. She reported that the RSPCA attended a meeting coordinated by Agriculture Victoria. She wrote,

"The situation remains hazardous and is still unfolding. The Agriculture Victoria Animal Welfare Commander is currently working with the Incident Agency Commander to determine animal welfare impacts and will keep us updated. Agriculture Victoria has confirmed that there is no additional assistance required from private veterinarians, RSCPA Victoria or other jurisdictions at this stage. This may change as information comes in and initial assessment is undertaken to the impacted properties."

She added, "RSPCA Victoria has the Mobile Animal Clinic (MAC) and operational staff on standby if required. At this stage we anticipate that the MAC with vets and Inspectors may need to be deployed later in the week. We may also need to provide shelter capacity to welfare board some companion animals."

To this Barrie Tapp has replied that their mobile clinic should be there NOW. He explains:

"We already have reports of animals suffering and some dead. Obviously there are going to be multiple complex cases, given the size of the bushfire. The mobile vet should be there ASAP so that they will be prepared for the inevitable influx."

Contact the RSPCA.

"My objective, with your help, honourable members, is to make Melbourne, and even Victoria, a great place to live. Not merely a great place in population size or area to rival such places as Shanghai, New York, London or Sao Paulo. Such greatness would be mere obesity, with all the disadvantages of such. Not a city or a state where people are crammed into dogbox apartments, living on crowded and congested streets in an environmentally unfriendly concrete heat island. But a spacious city with open skies, open and tree-filled streets, with gardens. An environment where children can play safely, where the car is not king but a servant.
Walkable patchworks of various styles of housing, where one would enjoy walking, cycling or travelling through by public transport. A city of learning, education, the arts and self-supporting industry, where families and communities can thrive. Where the less fortunate who may be living on lower incomes are not segregated into high-rise towers but live in affordable detached or medium-density housing spread throughout the suburbs. Where their children have the same opportunities as other children. Where ghettos of crime and despair are not created. A city where the environment—the living environment—is prized and of prime importance. A sustainable city or cities in a sustainable state. This can only happen when people are proud of their neighbourhoods and where they, as citizens, have control over what they create—the built form, the environment, the infrastructure. This is what, I believe, we as a Parliament can achieve." (Clifford Hayes, Extract from speech.)

[This speech was paragraphed by candobetter.net editor. It was taken from the unproofed Hansard transcript and will be revised if there are changes.]

Mr HAYES (Southern Metropolitan) (16:54:47): President and honourable members, especially new members, congratulations. I grew up in Brighton, the son of a doctor and a school teacher, so in many people’s eyes I had a life of privilege, but my parents had just bought a house, my father was starting his own medical practice from scratch and I was sent to Gardenvale state school. However, I did not like school, particularly getting the strap in my first few days there for playing in the third graders’ playground.

So when I learned to read, quite well, I told my mum I wanted to leave school. She laughed and told me I had to do another 12 years before I could leave.

I was devastated. By grade 3 my parents were able to send me to Brighton Grammar.

But in grade 4 my father suffered a terrible car accident, which affected him and his earning ability for the rest of his life. Mum worked, which was not that common in the early 1960s, and Dad brought in some money, so we got by okay. My two sisters and I managed to finish at private schools, but my father's situation got worse, and he relied on drinking and heavy medication, which by the end of our schooling left him totally incapacitated.

Being a bit of a rebel and not a great student, I decided on a very different course to the academic life so beloved by my parents. I had become interested in photography and filmmaking, and to my parents’ horror I wanted a career in the film industry. So I left home and went to work.

The Australian film industry was almost non-existent then. I found a job in the nascent television industry with Hector Crawford at Crawford Productions in Collins Street. My first job was on Homicide as a music editor, although I only had the vaguest idea of what that job entailed when I started. Over the next few years Crawfords produced the top three or four highest rating TV dramas in Australia at that time.

I went on to become a freelance film editor, and in 1979 I won an Australian Film Institute award for my part in editing Mad Max.

Members applauded.
The PRESIDENT: As tempting as it is, can we hold the applause until the end.

Mr HAYES: However, it was my experience working in the Northern Territory on the feature film We of the Never Never that changed my view on how we treated the first inhabitants of this land, and I came home a firm believer in Aboriginal land rights.

My parents, particularly my father, who was a keen advocate to the few who would listen back then for Indigenous recognition and other social issues, were both academic and left wing in political inclination, which was a pretty unusual stand compared to many of my friends’ parents in Brighton. So I was always interested in politics and comparing and arguing various points of view.

However, it was travelling overseas for six months when I was 24 which opened my eyes on how we lived in Australia. I was trying to find my way around the gridlocked streets of Bangkok, and looking over a bridge I saw swarming below a mass of humanity living in shacks on the side of a city canal, which would be no bigger than the Elwood canal down our way. A couple of hundred people were living down there—working, living and laughing.

I realized that there were many ways to live the life that I thought was normal from my little bubble in suburban Melbourne. I also realized that which so many Australian travellers come to see: we are all so enormously privileged to grow up and live in the open spaces and remaining nature of our suburbs and the surrounding countryside.

I lived in Sydney for a while working as an editor. Here I was in the heart of the film industry and lived the life of a continual after-work party—restaurants, bars, parties, picnics, drinking, eating and all that goes with it. It was the 1980s, and Sydney was a beautiful city and definitely the place to be. Few would disagree that most of the beauty around the harbour has now been spoiled by overdevelopment.

I got married and divorced in fairly quick succession. I bought an old farm house in a small town, Deans Marsh—between Geelong and Lorne—as a weekend retreat, and I became more and more interested in small-scale farming, self-sufficiency, agriculture and alternative lifestyles.

I got married again and we had a daughter followed by a son a couple of years later.

Computerisation had swept through the TV industry, enabling me to work from our farm house but often requiring travel back and forth to Melbourne. I studied for a diploma in applied science, farm management, by correspondence through Melbourne University, with a view to starting a small vineyard, which would certainly supplement my growing wine cellar. That was when devastation struck and my life had to change.

My wife wanted out, citing my lifestyle, the working, the drinking, the parties and generally being away from home too much. I was not much use as a father—and what is more, she was taking the kids. My drinking, smoking and party life had to stop.

I realised my health was being affected and my lifestyle was costing me more than money. I was losing friends, my lucrative business and now what I valued most—my family. I sought help and I found it through an organisation which pointed me to a path of spiritual recovery. As a result I no longer drink or smoke, nor do I take any mind-altering substances except caffeine, and have not done so for many years.

However, I did start that small vineyard on the Mornington Peninsula with a business partner. After a while I managed to reconcile with my family, and though my wife and I did not resume our marriage we became good friends and I had the opportunity to be the father I had always wanted to be to my children.

In 2003 I sold the vineyard and I moved back to Brighton again, buying an older style apartment with a backyard, where I still live today.

While I always had a political interest, my real political activity was about to start in the most unlikely way.

My mother, who still lived in the old family home nearby, told me that a developer had plans to build a 5-storey building of more than 100 apartments right behind her house. The whole street was affected, most of the houses being single storey.

All of our neighbours were up in arms: 'They can’t do this here!’. And the reply from our council: 'Oh yes, they can’.

It was Melbourne 2030, and we had been declared, without our knowledge, to be living in an activity centre.

What is more, the council had plans for more 4 and 5-storey buildings scattered around North Brighton.

Our group of residents decided to run someone against the local councillor. I was the only volunteer, and I ran on the issue, opposing high-rise development.

With huge community support, I was elected by a sizeable majority seeking to maintain our village character. Once elected, I had the full support of council in moving for more restrictive height controls in our village-style shopping centres and surrounding residential streets.

The minister, through his department, would not allow the changes, but after much lobbying he did grant so‑called 'discretionary’ height controls but at heights greater than the council’s decision.

The developers were still not happy and took the council to VCAT, where the VCAT member overruled the council’s refusal, saying discretionary controls gave him the discretion to break them. What is more, he and other members over the years took it upon themselves to give council lectures about our housing policy, developed out of widespread community consultation, for being too restrictive.

VCAT continues to grant permits for building heights far in excess of our meaningless discretionary controls as granted by the state government.

So much for the wishes of the community, or democracy, where elected bodies such as municipal councils can be overridden by a bureaucrat and increasingly by the state government.

This is where I discovered the general attitude of the planning bodies.

Senior planners in the government said to me, 'Councillor, if you don’t want high rise, you must want sprawl’.

I said, 'I don’t want either’, to which they replied, 'Well, where will you put the population?’.

Research showed me how population growth had been ramped up in recent years from a long-term average of 70 000 per annum to 200 000 people per annum. Melbourne is now growing by 2500 people, seeking accommodation, every week.

This fact is used by the government to overpower councils on the issue of planning in particular. Most government planners advocate urban consolidation and the destruction of our valued Australian suburban life. They talk of high-rise schools. Where will the children play?

To achieve this so-called consolidation, governments, planners and developers want to bring in more and more people, not from the outer suburbs but from overseas, to densify the inner city.

Who benefits? The developers and the property industry.

After being elected mayor of Bayside I joined an organisation called Planning Backlash. Led by the awesome Mary Drost, OAM, we represented planning groups with similar issues all across Melbourne and regional Victoria.

This group has led the campaign for greater say for residents and councils and has regularly met with all planning ministers, both Liberal and Labor, up until this minister, who no longer consults with us.

Rapid population growth has been connected with our planning problems.

Around this time I saw Dick Smith’s documentary and found the policies of Sustainable Australia. I came to see that global population growth and the corresponding increased pollution, greenhouse gas emissions, species decline and habitat destruction have made population growth the major environmental problem, both globally and locally.

Yet population growth was not even mentioned by the major political parties, including the Greens.

The Greens advocate lowering consumption, and rightly so, but until they realistically tackle the population issue they cannot address the current rate of environmental destruction and greenhouse gas emissions in this state or in this country.

This issue has nothing to do with race or religion, nor should it. For no matter how much we reduce consumption and the ensuing pollution per person, if we increase the population at the same time, we will make zero or even negative progress.

And we in this country are growing at rates far above the world population growth rate, and our greenhouse gas emissions keep on rising.

A similar charge could be made against the major parties, Labor and Liberal, who cry economic ruin if we reduce population growth by returning to 1980s or 1990s levels of immigration, as our party advocates.

They say the current rapid population growth raises gross domestic product. Yet, as we all know, GDP per head of population growth and wages growth have been stagnant over recent years as we have imported more and more workers.

In 2010 I met William Bourke and joined Sustainable Australia. Their policies on local planning, affordable housing, infrastructure, the environment and a more diverse economy appealed to my frustrated desires, particularly at a local level.

As to planning in this beautiful city and this bountiful state, planning should be a good thing, not like here, with our planning system—deregulated, discretionary and encouraging the atrocious.

Then we, the residents, hopefully with the support of our councils, try to make the proposal less bad. Even this process is under attack, with planning bodies such as the Grattan Institute seeking to remove third-party appeal rights. Even less local democracy is being demanded.

Planning, we believe, should be conceived at the local level, initiated by local planning groups or citizen juries. Planning should then set the agenda, set the social and environmental goals, the population density and height controls. Then developers would have to conform to these established local requirements—a democratic process.

Finally, just before I finish, I would like to thank a few people who helped me take this journey to find my way to this most historic and honourable chamber: William Bourke, our hardworking federal president and an invaluable mentor; Mary Drost, of indomitable spirit, and the committee of Planning Backlash; Richard Rozen and my supporters in Brighton Residents for Urban Protection; Derek, Evelyn, Kerrie, David, Beth, David and John of Restore Residents’ Rights; Jill Quirk, who ran in an election with me; Kelvin Thomson, a former MLA and an early advocate on population growth, who is now my fantastic chief of staff; Noel Pullen, a former MLC, who helped us in the planning battle; Alex Del Porto, James Long, Sonia Castelli and Bayside councillors past and present; my family, especially my two children, Alice and Harry.

My objective, with your help, honourable members, is to make Melbourne, and even Victoria, a great place to live. Not merely a great place in population size or area to rival such places as Shanghai, New York, London or Sao Paulo. Such greatness would be mere obesity, with all the disadvantages of such.

Not a city or a state where people are crammed into dogbox apartments, living on crowded and congested streets in an environmentally unfriendly concrete heat island. But a spacious city with open skies, open and tree-filled streets, with gardens. An environment where children can play safely, where the car is not king but a servant.

Walkable patchworks of various styles of housing, where one would enjoy walking, cycling or travelling through by public transport.

A city of learning, education, the arts and self-supporting industry, where families and communities can thrive. Where the less fortunate who may be living on lower incomes are not segregated into high-rise towers but live in affordable detached or medium-density housing spread throughout the suburbs. Where their children have the same opportunities as other children. Where ghettos of crime and despair are not created. A city where the environment—the living environment—is prized and of prime importance. A sustainable city or cities in a sustainable state. This can only happen when people are proud of their neighbourhoods and where they, as citizens, have control over what they create—the built form, the environment, the infrastructure. This is what, I believe, we as a Parliament can achieve.

Members applauded.

The Hon. Kelvin Thomson, former Federal Member for Wills, is joining the Sustainable Australia Party. Mr Thomson served as an Australian Labor Party Councillor for the City of Coburg from 1981 to 1988, Member of the Victorian Parliament for Pascoe Vale from 1988 to 1996, and Federal Labor Member for Wills for over 20 years from 1996 until the 2016 Election. Mr Thomson will be advising Sustainable Australia’s first elected Member of Parliament, Mr. Clifford Hayes, who was elected as a Legislative Councillor for the Southern Metropolitan Region at the recent Victorian election.

Mr Hayes said, “Kelvin Thomson’s knowledge of all three levels of government, his campaign experience - he stood for public office 12 times in his career and was successful on each occasion - and his policy development expertise, having been a Shadow Minister for the Environment amongst other Shadow Ministries, Parliamentary Secretary and member of many Parliamentary Committees during his parliamentary service, will make him an invaluable asset to me, my office and to the Sustainable Australia Party.

Mr Thomson said, "I first joined the Labor Party in 1975. It was an honour and privilege to represent the Australian Labor Party in two Parliaments and three levels of government for a total of 35 years. To say the Labor Party has been my life is putting it mildly. So I have submitted my resignation from the Labor Party with a very heavy heart.

“For a decade now I have set out what I believe to be the myopia, greed, vanity and ecological illiteracy that drives Big Australia, Australia's policy of rapid population growth. I have arrived at a point where there are irreconcilable differences between the course I believe Australia and the world needs to chart, and the course that the Australian Labor Party is charting. I set out in my Valedictory Speech my great appreciation of the support I received as an MP from ordinary members of the Labor Party, and those sentiments remain true. I retain a hope that in time the Labor Party will embrace views about Australia's population that are more in keeping with the needs of this generation, the needs of those who will come after us, and the needs of the many other species we have the good fortune to share this ancient, beautiful and fragile country with.

"What this world needs now is not more people, but more courage."

Sustainable Australia Party Founder and President William Bourke said, "Kelvin Thomson played a key role in kick-starting the population debate in Australia 10 years ago, with a speech he gave in Parliament in August 2009, and with a media release he put out in September 2009, in response to Treasury figures showing that Australia's population would be 35 million by 2049, a massive jump from the previous projection of 28 million by 2049, made just a couple of years earlier. He described this as a recipe for environmental disaster and called for population reform."

"The Sustainable Australia Party, formed in the wake of that debate, is a party of the political centre, and Kelvin and other mainstream, like-minded Australians are very welcome here."

Kelvin Thomson's letter of Resignation from the Australian Labor Party 13 January 2019

Samuel Rae
Victorian Branch Secretary
Australian Labor Party
438 Docklands Drive
DOCKLANDS VIC 3008

Dear Sam

This is a very hard letter for me to write. I first joined the Australian Labor Party in 1975.

Within a few years I had become a Branch Secretary, then Branch President, then delegate to the Victorian State Conference and President of the Wills FEA, Policy Committee member, and member of a number of local, State, and Federal Campaign Committees. I was later elected as a member of
the Public Office Selection Panel and served for a time as its President.

In 1981 I was elected as an endorsed Australian Labor Party Councillor for the City of Coburg, and reelected in 1982 and 1985, serving until 1988. In 1988 I was elected as an endorsed Australian Labor Party Member of the Victorian Parliament for the electorate of Pascoe Vale. I represented Pascoe Vale until 1996 and served as a Shadow Minister and Manager of Opposition Business during that time.

In 1996 I was elected to the Federal Parliament as the Labor Member for Wills. I was re-elected in 1998, 2001, 2004, 2007, 2010 and 2013, serving for over 20 years until I retired from Parliament in 2016. I served as a Labor Shadow Minister from 1998 till 2007. When Labor was elected to Government I became Chair of the Joint Standing Committee on Treaties, and later on served as a Parliamentary Secretary under 2 Labor Prime Ministers.

It was an honour and a privilege to represent the Australian Labor Party in 2 Parliaments and 3 levels of government for a total of over 35 years. To say the Labor Party has been my life is putting it mildly. As you know, I received my 40 Year Membership Medallion a couple of years ago. Since retiring from Parliament I have continued to provide assistance and support to Labor MPs and candidates in my area.

So I am writing this letter of resignation with a very heavy heart. There are many things I could talk about, but I accept this is always going to be true of any large political organisation. The one thing I cannot overlook is this. The world is undergoing unsustainable population growth – it has more than doubled in the last 50 years. I can’t do much about that, but Australia is one of the worst offenders. So too Victoria. So too Melbourne. The Australian Labor Party of the 21st Century has embraced Australia’s 21st Century rapid population growth, known by the shorthand expression of Big Australia. The 55,000 annual net overseas migration of the Whitlam years, when I joined, has turned into over 200,000 annual net overseas migration. Here in Victoria we have embraced Big Victoria
and Big Melbourne.

For a decade now I have set out what I believe to be the myopia, greed, vanity and ecological illiteracy that drives Big Australia. I won’t insult your intelligence by repeating my arguments. Suffice to say that I have arrived at a point where there are irreconcilable differences between the course I believe Australia and the world needs to chart, and the course that the Australian Labor Party is charting.

It is true that neither the Liberal nor the Greens Parties have any more enlightened approaches to the issue, but there is a Party – Sustainable Australia – which does get it. As they say in the US, everyone has the right to the pursuit of happiness. It is well established that an important ingredient of happiness is the opportunity to spend your days doing something you believe in. What I believe is that exponential population growth is not merely a problem, but that it is the problem that reinforces all others. I agree with David Attenborough – “I’ve never seen a problem that wouldn’t be easier to solve with fewer people, or harder, and ultimately impossible, with more”.

I have been given an opportunity by the Sustainable Australia Party’s Victorian MLC Cliff Hayes to do something I really believe in. It is an opportunity too good to pass up. Obviously that is not consistent with my remaining a Labor Party member, hence this letter.

I set out in my Valedictory Speech my great appreciation of the support I received as an MP from ordinary members of the Labor Party, and those sentiments remain true. I retain a hope that in time Labor will embrace views about Australia’s population that are more in keeping with the needs of this generation, the needs of those who will come after us, and the needs of the many other species we have the good fortune to share this ancient, beautiful and fragile country with.

Yours sincerely
The Hon. Kelvin Thomson
[email protected]
11 January 2019

Kelvin Thomson's resignation letter as pdf file - click here.

Please see attached pdf call for submissions to kayaking at Frankston Nature Conservation Reserve. "[...] I nor the friends received this directly. It was forwarded to me from the equally outraged Frankston Environmental Friends Network. The Regulations specific for the reserve which were put in place by the Minister for the Environment in 2015 were revoked on 1 February 2018, making the reserve a free-for-all. All of the protection work for the reserve, fought for many years has been ignored and overridden by the Andrews Labor Government. Accordingly, Paul Edbrooke will find his place last on my ballot paper," writes Frankston Councillor, Quinn McCormack.

Quinn McCormack writes: "Please put in a submission against this proposal. I suggest sending not only a submission to Parks Victoria but also to the Minster for the Environment, Shadow Minister for the Environment, and to the reserve email address so that it doesn't get lost in the Parks Victoria system. Due date is is December 1.

The claim is that the community was consulted in December 2017 - I was not consulted and I am not aware of a single member of the reserve friends group being consulted. There WAS NO COMMUNITY CONSULTATION. It seems that it was a selective survey of a handful of recreational interest groups and mates.

Relevant email addresses:

[email protected]
lily.d'[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]

In a nutshell, the proposal to introduce kayaking is inconsistent with the reserve status as a Nature Conservation Reserve, inconsistent with the full community consultation undertaken over more than 10 years, damaging to flora, damaging to fauna, damaging to water quality and downright dangerous.

- Frankston Nature Conservation Reserve specific Regulations, which were in place until 1 February 2018 expressly excluded activities such as kayaking and cycling. Why would any decent management authority create a management plan which is directly contradictory to enacted Regulations?

Toxic deepwater danger in old mine shaft 20m deep - No ranger present either

- There was no assessment as to the quality nor impact to the flora and fauna condition at the reserve before making changes to access arrangements and determining future appropriate activities.

- Kayaking will ultimately result in a rare high quality freshwater body (previously potable water) becoming contaminated, and eventually having toxic algal blooms as the water body is too deep to turn over.

- Public safety has not been assessed - no ranger is present and the water body is 20metres deep, having been constructed as a reservoir from an old mine site. A water body of this magnitude is rare in an urban setting and planning should consider it in this context.

Ecological impact

- Kayaking will have a detrimental impact to two endangered vegetation communities - Submerged Aquatic Herbland and Aquatic sedgeland, endangered and vulnerable in the Gippsland Plains Bioregion respectively.

- FFG Act listed species - Musk Duck, Blue-billed Duck, and Freckled Duck - use the water body.

- Additional species at risk locally such as the Snake-necked turtle and frog species which inhabit the reserve, such as the nationally threatened Growling Grass Frog.

- There was no consultation with key stakeholders (such as the Friends group for the reserve) nor with the broader community about potential future activities at the reserve."

[Candobetter.net Editor: The points put forward by Councillor Quinn were rearranged by the editor.]

The National Dingo Preservation and Recovery Program (NDPRP) today expressed dismay at the failure of the Victorian Labor government to put its own apex predator conservation policy into practice.

The Victorian Labor government recently committed to:
 
“recognise and protect the ecological function of existing dingo populations within Victorian ecosystems as part of biodiversity programs and management initiatives”
 
and to maintain:
 
“…, existing native apex predators in natural ecosystems and, investigate the potential functional role of reintroduced native apex predators in north-west Victoria”.
 
 

“Although the Victorian Labor government has recently refined and extended its policy commitment to protect dingo populations and their crucial ecological role, the government has failed at the very first significant test of that commitment,” NDPRP spokesperson Arthur Gorrie said.
 
“In September 2018, the Victorian government had the opportunity to correct the serious deficiencies of earlier dingo protection measures put in place after the listing of the dingo as a threatened species in 2010. The expiry of these measures provided the Minister for the Environment, the Hon Lily D’Ambrosio, with an opportunity to rectify these deficiencies.
 
“Many areas of Victoria where the dingo was unprotected at the time of the dingo threatened species listing, under the pretext of protecting farm stock from dingo predation, have in practice proven unnecessary, as in north western Victoria where there is very little sheep farming, with negligible stock losses. Yet, lethal dingo control in this part of the state was sanctioned with significant numbers of dingoes killed annually. Also, the very narrow genetic definition of the dingo used by the Victorian government means that many high conservation value dingo hybrids continued to be governed as vermin in Victoria by Agriculture authorities rather than as wildlife by biodiversity authorities.
 
“In July 2018, an extensive list of pre-eminent Australian environmental scientists jointly wrote to the Victorian government, urging it not to renew the dingo un-protection arrangements, along with the Humane Society International and other conservation organisations. The current arrangements were deemed to be unnecessary, ultimately ineffective and environmentally harmful. The government’s attention was also drawn to the need to afford protection to dingo hybrids. The experts especially drew attention to the need to cease lethal control of dingoes and ecologically functional hybrids in north western Victoria. Yet, this high level advice simply fell on deaf ears.
 
“At this point, there is a serious credibility gap between policy and conservation practice for the Victorian government in the area of apex predator conservation. The government now needs to explain why it ignored such high level advice and its own recent policy pronouncements on this key biodiversity issue..
 
“Why has the Victorian government failed to act, particularly in relation to north western Victoria, where the case for stock protection is so weak and where the opportunity for apex predator conservation and its biodiversity benefits so compelling?
 
“The NDPRP considers that the answer lies in part with a back room power sharing deal between Biodiversity and Agriculture bureaucracies, which hands a disproportionate degree of authority over dingo governance to Agriculture officials. The NDPRP considers that, rather than try to claw back control over this important area of biodiversity governance, Biodiversity bureaucracies appear more concerned with keeping face with the department of Agriculture. As a result, it appears that the Minister for the Environment remains inadequately briefed on the issue, including the need for Biodiversity to regain control over the governance of dingo hybrids.  The NDPRP understands that the Minister for the Environment, the Hon. Lily D’Ambrosio, is yet to receive a designated, comprehensive briefing on the apex predator issue and that Biodiversity officers have no intention to provide such a briefing in the foreseeable future.
 
“In light of recent progressive Victorian Labor government policy pronouncements on the apex predator issue, the NDPRP considers that any failure to adequately brief the Minister is unacceptable. In effect, it appears that the Minister for the Environment has been rendered incapable of performing her responsibilities on this environmental issue.
 
“The NDPRP urges the Victorian Minister for the Environment, the Hon. Lily D’Ambrosio, to seek the best external expert scientific advice on how to put her government’s progressive apex predator policy into practice. The recent renewal of the dingo un-protection arrangements, unchanged, for a further 5 years must be revisited by the Minister. To date, departmental advice appears to have been deficient. Important questions remain: was the Environment Minister even informed by her department of the collective appeal of Australia’s pre-eminent environmental scientists and peak environmental organisations for reform around the dingo un-protection issue?

 
National Dingo Preservation and Recovery Program Inc.

On Tuesday May 29 at 10:00am AEST, Boomerang Alliance and a small delegation of supporters in costumes with a 3 metre long Coke bottle will present the Premier of Victoria Daniel Andrews at his electorate office in Noble Park with 12 large bags filled with beverage containers collected on tour as a token of the resounding message received from the people of Victoria - "We demand a container deposit scheme now!"

Travelling over 2500kms in April 2018, the Big Bottle visited 10 towns across the state asking Victorians their views on a container deposit scheme (CDS). Not only were people and local councils overwhelmingly in support, they readily expressed their frustration at the inactivity from successive governments.

Victoria will soon be the only mainland state without a 10 cents container deposit scheme. Victorians are calling on the state government to implement a container deposit legislation without further delay. A container deposit scheme will reduce litter, increase recycling rates, decrease the contamination rate and provide great fundraising opportunities for charity and community groups, especially in regional areas.

*Containers delivered will include plastic and aluminium containers only. All glass containers collected were recycled locally.

The Public Housing Defence Network is calling for the Opposition parties to support the Greens motion in Parliament on Wednesday 6 June 2018 to block the Andrews Governments Public Housing Renewal Programme (PHRP). The PHRP reduces Public Housing, displaces tenants, sells off public land to private developers and reduces open space and amenity, and will drive up homelessness. If you would like to stop the Andrews Government PHRP, please contact the Opposition MPs from Monday 28 May, by email, phone, or text. (See suggested letter and addresses inside.) Every action counts!

Here is a suggested text:

“Dear Parliamentarian,
I oppose the Andrews Government`s Public Housing Renewal Programme, and call on Parliamentarians to vote to block it in the Legislative Council of Parliament by disallowing the Planning Minister`s assumption of planning powers.”

Add your name, suburb. Preferably full address and phone, too.

Please phone or text these 4 Liberal politicians: Matthew Guy: 9651 6702; David Davis: 9827 6655; John Pesutto: 9882 4088; Georgie Crozier 9555 4101;
Plus one bulk email to all these Parliamentarians:

[email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; edward.o'[email protected]; [email protected]; Luke.O'[email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected];
[email protected]; [email protected];
[email protected];
[email protected];

There may be a rally outside the office of Liberal MP David Davis or at Parliament in the lead up to the likely vote on Wednesday 6th June. See Public Housing Defense Network facebook page for details.

https://www.facebook.com/publichousingdefencenetwork/

Signed:
Public Housing Defence Network (PHDN)
Defend and Extend Public Housing (Australia)
Friends of Public Housing (Victoria)

My first memories are of when I was a tiny sapling amongst my contemporaries bordering the fence line of a sprawling four bedroom house, a house which was the height of fashion in architecture back then in 1912. It was a lovely environment for me to grow up in as it was for the children who lived in the house. They used to spend a lot of time with us outside, especially in the warmer months. They had a swing suspended with ropes from a branch of one of the larger trees. Mostly they took it in turns, but occasionally they would quarrel over whose turn it was next. One of the children built a tree house in that same tree and used to sit up on high, higher than I was, reading his favourite books and eating biscuits.

Eventually the children grew up and moved away but not before many happy social occasions in that garden which became more complex and beautiful as we smaller trees grew, spreading and intertwining our branches, casting a filigree shade on the lawn.

End of the first era

The day the house was sold, we all looked on with trepidation. The first couple who had bought it moved to another city after being there for nearly thirty years We had enjoyed this family who didn't make a lot of demands on us and included us in their alfresco entertainment, rarely causing any cuts or abrasions of our roots with the lawn mower.

The house was auctioned and we trees were an important part part of the marketing campaign! I was thrilled and proud. The older trees had acquired an absolute grandeur of scale with their straight trunks. Although I say it myself, I was a very attractive … with delicate blossoms in summer. I was developing a character of my own.

The house sold at auction for more than twice what "my family" had paid all those years ago. The new family had three children, already teenagers. We didn't see the same games played in the garden, but the children did spend a lot of time with us. The boys used to kick a football to one another, often bumping me in the same place on my trunk each time. It didn't really hurt, but was a little annoying. Despite this minor irritation, we were all good friends and co-existed happily. By this time I could see out into the street. I could not see over the house but, as I was near the fence, I had been looking out into the street for some time. It was interesting watching the passing trams, the cars, all in different colours, and the horse drawn vehicles. I came to know when the grey horse would pass by with ice for the ice chest inside our house and the brown horse hauling the bakers cart. They were happy days and I was never bored. I saw things slowly change over the next couple of decades. I no longer saw the horses, I saw more cars. The trams still rumbled along the track on the road.

Loss

One day I got a terrible shock! I had been very friendly with a eucalypt over our fence. He was about my age but quite a bit taller. He used to enjoy watching what went on in our garden and we would chat over the fence. On this terrible day there was an ear splitting noise. I saw a man aloft in the next door tree. He was cutting off the branches some of which fell on top of me and into our garden. The next door tree looked terrified and was moaning with pain. I didn't know what to do and felt paralysed with grief. My friend was being decimated before my eyes. It was my first loss.

I was sad when our first family left but I am a tree and I felt far more about losing a fellow tree than about people. Furthermore, I knew that our family was happy to be leaving, and were looking forward to new adventures. This loss of one of my kind, so sudden and unexpected, touched me at my very roots. Within an hour my friend was gone. I watched as, branch by branch, he disappeared and, finally, with a loud crack, he was felled to the ground. I was devastated, as were my contemporaries and the older trees. A silence fell in our garden for the next week. Gradually we started to talk and expressed our fears to one another. If this could happen to our neighbour what was to stop it happening to any of us?

Apart from this fear things did not feel the same without our friend and neighbour. We were in shock, in fact, especially me. For the next few months I looked over the fence to see what was happening, why my friend had been removed. Small green sprouts started to appear and by summer there were a number of red fruits, tomatoes The man next door pulled on some of the leaves sprouting out of the ground - carrots , things he seemed to value highly and collect in a wicker basket. I could see that this produce could not have been grown with a large tree over shadowing and taking up space but was it worth the sacrifice?

Acceptance

As years went by I got used to the new climate since our neighbour had been felled. I accepted the afternoon heat on my western side which had previously been shielded.

Decades went by. The view into the street was far busier but less varied and interesting . The cars became large and square, more like buses. The trams still rumbled by, but sported a different more streamlined look. My job of absorbing carbon dioxide became harder and I felt tired more often.

Under attack

Fast forward to 2018. The house was sold again. We trees were not at all a marketing feature this time. The board at the front showed an ominous red outline around all of us seen from above and in context with other neighbouring properties. We were in the firing line. I could see that. The red outline meant that all land within it could be utilised, built on, and be a rental earner. Auction day came. The property sold for $2.16 million. The house did not count at all. People hardly looked inside. This was land value only, and the value was 300 times that of the land and the brand new house back in 1912!

A feeling of doom come over me. I knew nobody would ever live in the house again. No children would ever again swing from our branches. There would be no more footballs kicked into my trunk, no more lazy summer afternoon parties in the shade of our branches.

The bulldozers arrived. I trembled to my deepest roots. One by one members of my family were cut down as had been my friend from next door all those years ago. This time it was devastation. By the end of the day, nothing was left but me standing right on the edge near the fence, alone. I was just a specimen, a reminder, a nod to what had been before.

As night fell, the cries of displaced possums reached me. Distress was in the air. My loneliness and fear were overwhelming. What was my future? What was going to surround me from now on?
The next day all was quiet. No work was done and rain fell on scars of what had been a haven in suburbia, a quiet place of contemplation. All was awash with gritty tears from a heavy sky.
A few days later the excavations began. Different coloured layers of clay were exposed as the earth that had supported my family of trees was discarded as a waste product of what was about to be constructed.

My fate

Now my roots are surrounded by concrete. I stand alone in an expanse of paving and concrete. I am dwarfed by a six storey block of apartments. Most of my view to the street is blocked by the width of this characterless edifice. It doesn't matter. I have lost interest as I have no company apart from two displaced magpies who now have nowhere to search for food.
It makes me think of an old song that I used to hear through the windows of the sprawling four bedroom house

"……nothing but acres of tar and cement…..where are the lilacs?…all of it's gone….."

"In an irresponsible and callous move and buried in the discussion paper of the Authority To Control Wildlife Review, the Daniel Andrews’ Government has signalled interest in adopting a policy that will see ALL sick, injured and orphaned kangaroos, wombats, possums and cockatoos KILLED instead of rescued and rehabilitated. This short-sighted and catastrophic policy may act to drive wildlife carers underground and will see members of the public refusing to hand over animals to vets and shelters in the fear that joeys and saveable animals will be automatically killed, resulting in horrendous and widespread animal suffering." (Helen Round, Wildlife carer, Macedon Ranges, Victoria.)

Text of letter to media

As one of the wildlife carers in Victoria, who shoulders much of the cost and responsibility of caring for sick, orphaned and injured wildlife in Victoria, I am writing to you because of a recent horrific proposal coming from the Andrews' State Government that could force Victorian wildlife carers to kill all healthy, saveable and viable kangaroos, wombats, possums and cockatoos that come in to care.

It’s a tough life being a volunteer. Apart from the exhausting, relentlessly routine physical work involved in wildlife rehabilitation, (cleaning pens & feed bins, round the clock feeding schedules), there’s the financial outlay on items like feeding equipment, cloth pouches, towels, fencing materials, veterinary medications, petrol and electricity bills.

Wildlife carers – who are mostly overtired, under resourced and overstretched women – are currently fighting a state government proposal that will result in mass animal deaths and horrific and widespread animal suffering. But, we need to be visible to be effective and that is why I am writing to you.

Authority to control wildlife - culling abuses

In an irresponsible and callous move and buried in the discussion paper of the Authority To Control Wildlife Review, the Daniel Andrews’ Government has signalled interest in adopting a policy that will see ALL sick, injured and orphaned kangaroos, wombats, possums and cockatoos KILLED instead of rescued and rehabilitated. This short-sighted and catastrophic policy may act to drive wildlife carers underground and will see members of the public refusing to hand over animals to vets and shelters in the fear that joeys and saveable animals will be automatically killed, resulting in horrendous and widespread animal suffering.

As they rescue and rehabilitate injured and orphaned wildlife, 24 hours a day, 7 days a week, 365 days a year, hundreds, if not thousands, of trained, experienced and self-funded volunteer wildlife carers and rescuers provide a service to the community that the public expect and the government fails to and cannot hope to provide.

Shockingly, volunteers fund all wildlife rescue and rehabilitation from their own pockets with no funding from the state government apart from a tokenistic and inadequate annual wildlife shelter grant system. Yet the Andrews’ Government is planning to deprive the community of this invaluable service, declaring that it is too costly to raise these animals and that they want to free up shelter resources. This is a cynical and disingenuous ploy and an insulting falsehood from a government who does not fund wildlife rescue and rehabilitation and support a raft of policies that are detrimental to wildlife across all sectors.

No one else can give the same level of service with the commitment, dedication and efficiency that existing volunteer wildlife carers and rescuers provide. No Government budget would be big enough and no department would be competent enough to achieve the same outcomes.

As carers and rescuers, we are committed to rescuing injured animals and we will continue to rescue and euthanise when necessary but, we will not become Daniel Andrew’s ‘killing machines’ to slaughter viable and healthy animals. We will not facilitate a policy that is morally corrupt and that has no scientific merit.

It is incomprehensible that politicians and bureaucrats have not considered the psychological impact these cruel policies will have on wildlife rescuers, carers and veterinarians who will be expected to kill viable animals, let alone the impact on members of the community who also encounter wildlife in need.

The fate of Victoria’s native wildlife is in the hands of a mega-department with interests that conflict with flora and fauna conservation and that is actively working to harm and exploit wildlife for political and economic gain.

I want to ask everyone to contact Victorian parliamentarians and remind them that wildlife and wildlife volunteers are valued, that Australia has the highest rate of mammalian extinction on the planet and that all ‘threatened’ and ‘extinct species’ were once considered ‘common and secure’.

Today Mary Drost, of Planning Backlash, went to a Forum in South Yarra to meet the 14 candidates for Lord Mayor of Melbourne. She says, "We need a good Lord Mayor and not one who will overdevelop and wreck our city even more. These last few years have been terrible. Go and take a look. If you use a search engine to check the population of cities in North America and Western Europe, you will find that Melbourne and Sydney are bigger than all cities except New York, Toronto, London, Paris and Berlin, and add Singapore as that is first world also. We are increasing much too fast - it is wrong."

At the forum, there were ten mayoral candidates and a big crowd of residents. There were probably developers there as well.

They all spoke and then there were questions. Mary had the last question and it was to Sally Capp, Chair of the Property Council and, it seems, a front runner. Mary's question was,

"You are head of the Property Council, so, if a development was proposed and the residents objected to it, but the Property Council urged you to approve it, what would you do?

Sally gave a long answer, which Mary thought really said nothing, seeming to say that she would support the residents if they all thought the same.

Mary responded, "But you hate resident groups, I learned that at Planning Panels."

Mary says she thinks it would be a disaster for Melbourne if Sally Capp gets in. She would vote for Gary Morgan or Michael Burge or Sally Warhaft. At the bottom of her list would be Sally Capp, Ken Ong and Rohan Leppert. She adds that the council has been so dysfunctional, that she doesn't think it is a good idea for a present councillor to be Lord Mayor. Leppert was Deputy Chair of Planning and Ong was Chair. "Think of the damage to Melbourne with their planning in the last few years," she concluded.

Thousands of pet birds in Victoria will be subjected to totally unnecessary, inexcusable and inhumane stress after Agriculture Minister Jaala Pulford rubber-stamped a request from bird keepers to ignore Victorian law relating to the sale of non-native birds, warns Animal Justice Party president, Bruce Poon. According to Victorian law, bird species which originated outside Australia cannot legally be sold in Victoria except from pet shops and private residences.

Animal Justice Party president Bruce Poon said “The meaning of this law is clear and straightforward. It means that those birds cannot be removed from their normal locations and taken to sales such as those organised by bird clubs associated with the Victorian Avicultural Council”.

According to Poon, the Minister’s move is a disgrace.

“The minister should have greater regard for the welfare of the birds, which are taken from reasonably-sized aviaries and then stressed by being put into tiny boxes to be taken to sales where they are subjected to prodding and up-close-and-personal examination by hundreds of people for up to six hours,” (see photos below)

“It is especially upsetting because the clubs, urged on by the Victorian Avicultural Council, had previously flouted the law by displaying non-native birds at sales, supposedly not for sale, but with mobile phone numbers on the boxes clearly intended for the purpose of communicating sales.”

“By doing that bird keepers made an ass of the law and of the Minister, facilitating illegal sales, treating the law with complete contempt and subjecting birds to needless stress, all in the name of profit,” Mr Poon said.

“The Animal Justice Party, which is greatly concerned for the welfare of those birds, urges the Minister to cancel the exemption she granted which allows non-native birds to be sold at bird sales in Victoria.”

St Kilda Road and Hoddle Street widening to accommodate larger volumes of road traffic in Melbourne means bulldozing hundreds of beautiful, mature trees, cultivated in a time when people appreciated the importance of natural shade and beauty. This vandalism is caused by willful promotion of overpopulation by the Victorian State government. Furtively supported by an equally venal Opposition, invited economic mass immigration-caused population growth marches on like an invasion preceded by bulldozers, jack hammers and all manner of violence towards our environment and display of might by state governments. Australia grew by over half a million people between July 2016 and July 2017, although natural increase actually declined, almost certainly due to rising costs affecting Australia's fertility opportunity.[1]

Swamped by the numbers

Excuse me, but it seems that Pauline Hanson was right, at least on the numbers: We are being 'swamped' - at a rate of Overseas immigrants 63.0 : Australian citizens and residents 36.8 - by the numbers - wherever they come from. These latest growth figures were due 63% to overseas immigration; only 36.8% from natural increase between July 2016 and July 2017. (See the latest ABS graph and details below.) It doesn't matter where they come from; the point is that accommodating these numbers is overwhelming our native animal habitat, our infrastructure, our social organisation, our legal and planning system (which is changing to remove public consultation over expansion and which simply does not enforce wildlife protection laws) and our democracy - because government is more interested in feathering the pockets of the growth lobby than serving the electorate, keeping housing prices down, providing education to young people and helping local business.

We are also being swamped by hype

The cause of the growth is Australian state governments' constant invitations to overseas immigrants to come and settle here, greatly magnified by internet reach since the late 1990s. Immigration marketing is typified by the illustration we have labelled "Immigration Hype", which depicts a young couple with a baby in a leafy suburb. The reality, of course, is that both young couples with babies and leafy suburbs are declining - due to incredibly high rates of immigration. Although population growth is the number one subject on radio, TV and print media, it is promoted slickly as 'vibrant', 'booming', 'bonanza', 'housing investment opportunity', and the constant citizen and resident protests [See /taxonomy/term/582 and /taxonomy/term/1193] are hardly ever even reported outside https://candobetter.net, thus many Australians feel alone in the midst of this onslaught.

Our governments don't listen to us, but they have even stopped talking normally to us. Instead they repetitively sloganize us about how 'livable' our cities are, like crass advertisers, backed solidly by the growth lobby mouthpiece of the mainstream press and the ABC. The latest boast that they are making is that Australia's population growth will move our economy up to 11th largest economy in the world. It's about as impressive as listening to teenagers boast about how much they can drink; we know it's going to end in a mess.

Plummeting standards of living and quality of life and environment

Our standards of living and quality of life are all plummeting, so we can only fear the future that our unrepresentative governments are socially engineering us towards. We have been a net-importer of petroleum for years. Our land is 30% hot desert and 40% non-arable rangeland. Our major inland river basin has been in ecological strife for more than a century and we are told that climate change will reduce rainfall. We face life-threatening increases in temperature and we are expanding into bigger and bigger heat-islands, called cities. Our non-consensual population increase policy will turn this land into a Mars. This land was wrested from a population that inhabited it sustainably for 60,000 years! And this is progress? Not!

Australians wary of having children in view of such poor economic outlook

Whilst immigration rates have gone up yet again, over the July 2016-2017 period, Australia's natural increase has actually declined. This decline can be explained by Virginia Abernethy's theory of the Fertility Opportunity,[1] where people see that the future looks dim, so they choose not to have children. This is surely the feeling young people must have as immigrants crowd in by the hundreds of thousands in an economic environment of ongoing deterioration in an already declining quality and standard of living for all but a tiny elite. See http://www.theaustralian.com.au/national-affairs/living-standards-in-decline-as-real-wage-growth-stagnates/news-story/a95f1b82064fd39e919deec3fd0a9a91

International comparison chart from the Australian Bureau of Statistics

For the 12 months ended 30 June 2017, Australia's population growth rate of 1.6% was above that of the world at 1.1%. Australia is growing at a faster rate than every selected country except for Papua New Guinea (2.1%). The Philippines and Singapore were the next fastest growing countries (both at 1.5%) followed by Malaysia (1.4%) and South Africa (1.3%).



According to figures from the United Nations, Department of Economics and Social Affairs, Australia's population ranked 53rd highest in the world in 2017 and is projected to rank 56th by 2050. By 2050, India is projected to have displaced China as the most populous country with 1.7 billion people compared with 1.4 billion in China.

POPULATION, GROWTH RATE AND RANK (a)(b), Summary
	ESTIMATED RESIDENT POPULATION			PROJECTED POPULATION	RANK
	2016	2017	Growth Rate	2050	2017	2050
Selected Countries	million	million	%	million	no.	no.
Australia	24	25	1.6	38	53	56
Canada	36	37	0.9	45	38	46
China (excl. SARs and Taiwan)	1 404	1 410	0.4	1 364	1	2
France	65	65	0.4	71	22	28
Greece	11	11	-0.2	10	82	98
Hong Kong (SAR of China)	7	7	0.8	8	104	111
India	1 324	1 339	1.1	1 659	2	1
Indonesia	261	264	1.1	322	4	5
Italy	59	59	-0.1	55	23	36
Japan	128	127	-0.2	109	11	17
Korea (South)	51	51	0.4	50	27	41
Malaysia	32	32	1.4	42	45	50
New Zealand	5	5	1.0	6	125	126
Papua New Guinea	8	8	2.1	14	101	86
Philippines	103	105	1.5	151	13	13
Singapore	6	6	1.5	7	115	120
South Africa	56	57	1.3	73	25	27
Sweden	10	10	0.7	12	89	93
United Kingdom	66	66	0.6	75	21	26
United States of America	322	324	0.7	390	3	4
Viet Nam	95	96	1.0	115	15	16
World	7 467	7 550	1.1	9 772	. .	. .
. . not applicable
(a) Selected countries include major OECD countries, the world's most populous countries, Australia's closest neighbours and trading partners.
(b) Selected country and world estimates and projections for 2016/2017 and 2050 are from United Nations World Population Prospects: The 2017 Revision (medium variant projections).
Source: Australian estimates - this issue of Australian Demographic Statistics (cat. no. 3101.0); Australian projections; Series B in Population Projections, Australia, 2012 (base) to 2101 (cat. no. 3222.0). Selected country and world estimates and projections - United Nations, Department of Economic and Social Affairs, Population Division (2017). World Population Prospects: the 2017 Revision, custom data acquired via website (medium variant projections).

Your reference for the graphs and quotations from the Australian Bureau of Statistics is: http://www.abs.gov.au/ausstats/[email protected]/Latestproducts/3101.0Main%20Features2Jun%202017?opendocument&tabname=Summary&prodno=3101.0&issue=Jun%202017&num=&view=: Annual Population Change, Year ending 30 June 2017.

NOTES

The Fertility Opportunity Theory: "The causal relationship between perceived opportunity and desired family size is described as the fertility opportunity hypothesis. The fertility opportunity hypothesis accounts for either rising or falling fertility rates.

Absolute level of poverty or affluence is not the primary factor driving decisions and action. Motivation derives from perception. Perceptions arise relative to past experiences or by comparison with a reference group. Thus, the fertility opportunity hypothesis applies in hunter-gatherer societies, agrarian societies, and both developing and industrialized countries. The belief that resources are ample, or not, develops against a specific society’s baseline expectations.

Whereas some demographers still write as though modernization and prosperity are necessary preconditions for smaller family size, the fertility opportunity hypothesis documents a nearly opposite dynamic. People in all types of societies work to limit births when they perceive that resources are shrinking, margins are smaller, and competition has stiffened." Cited from Virginia Abernethy, "Fossil Fuel Energy and Fertility Rates," Vanderbilt University, 2004. https://media.eurekalert.org/aaasnewsroom/2004/2Abernethy-FossilFuel-Paper.doc

The Victorian Liberals have been running public population forums for their "Victorian Population Policy Taskforce." Please read on to get an idea of what is involved and how you might use these forums for good, despite their cynical nature. The article includes a list of the forums still to be held at time of writing this article. As you would expect, the people comprising the Taskforce include some heavy hitters from the extreme growth lobby and, really only one person who has questioned population growth policy - Dr Bob Birrell. We can be sure that the Liberal politicians and other growth lobby activists behind the forums are pushing for extreme population growth to continue despite its awful consequences, just as the Victorian Labor Government is. The purpose of the forums is to manufacture consent by pretending that current immigration numbers cannot be stopped or reduced, however bleak their impact. The message is put in pseudo solidarity as, "Yes, we feel your pain, we wish we could do something, but we cannot." This throws the audiences into a state of helplessness. However, the forums do present the possibility of people who actually know the facts and are concerned about citizens, residents' rights and wildlife needs, to reach the wide spectrum of people who come to the forums and point to the way out of the false dilemma. Those audiences are dying to hear that the political parties (in and out of government) have the capacity to stop the massive population growth and that Australians should and must resist it. Consider taking copies of The Residents' Bill of Rights, which proposes that Australian growth be brought in line with the OECD average. Consider printing out this recent Population Flyer and taking copies. You might also consider taking a copy of recently retired Labor MP Kelvin Thomson's 14 point plan, which is a viable and well-informed plan to stabilise Australia's population. Inside this article there are also recent ABS and OECD graphs and a population doubling time calculator.

Most of the people comprising the "Victorian Population Policy Taskforce" are obviously from the fox side of the henhouse. The only 'community activist' is known for her opposition to speaking out on population growth. Jane Nathan, is the president of The Australian Population Institute (APOP), which was formed solely to promote a big population for Australia. Asher Judah is a Property Council of Victoria executive and a research fellow with the very right-wing Institute of Public Affairs (IPA) with a background that includes the Master Builders Association and the Victorian Farmers Federation. David Matthews is known for his involvement in agribusiness and banking. Jason Potts is a fan of immigration tariffs and an Adjunct Fellow at the Institute of Public Affairs. Peter Tesdorpf is a former Victorian President of the Planning Institute and is Principal at Peter Tesdorpf and Associates. Joanna Stanley of Brunswick Residents Group has been associated with Planning Backlash and has this description at Linked In "Particularly accomplished in media and stakeholder relations in planning and issues in community." Recently Joanna has been outspoken against any push against population growth that BRAG and Planning Backlash have put up for consideration. The taskforce's advisors also include Bob Birrell, Sociologist and President of The Australian Population Research Institute (TAPRI), a conservationist and not a fan of big Australia.

The Rosebud Population Taskforce Forum

I went to one of these forums with some curiosity. I've been having nightmares ever since. The gloves are really off in the growth lobby. As an ex-planner said to me, "They're not even trying to hide the fact that they are forcing a huge population on us anymore." The forum was, however, a bit better than I expected, in some ways. One way was that more than half the time was given to responses from the audience, with good access to microphones and little prescriptiveness on what we said. But very few in the audience seemed to have any idea of what was happening. Most looked grim or horrified.

A good thing was that the contribution of immigration was admitted. In fact the rate of Victoria's population growth was described with due horror by 'keynote speaker', the politician, Tim Smith MP for Kew. The effect this would have on the Mornington Peninsular was evoked as likely to be frightening and unpleasant. (See the OECD graph where Australia ranks highest in population growth of all OECD countries.)

State websites solicit for immigrants; it's not just the Federal Government

I spoke of the state government websites inviting immigration[3] and of how this was off-the-scale population engineering by the state. As usual, this statement caused some surprise because of the mantra that the state can do nothing because the Federal Government sets immigration numbers. (As if the states couldn't object, anyhow.) The Liberal Taskforce say they want to promote decentralisation by creating small cities all over the countryside, including the Mornington Peninsula. But Victoria already offers 'Skilled Regional (489) visas', which require the sponsored immigrant and any sponsored dependents to live and work in regional Victoria whilst under this visa, which was, in fact, introduced by Victorian Liberal Premier Jeff Kennett in 1998.

Forum treated our massive rates of immigration as if they could not be questioned

A bad thing about this forum was that the huge population growth due to mass immigration was presented as a given, with only 'management' solutions contemplated by the speakers. It was as if Victoria's population growth of 2.1% (actually 2.4% according to latest ABS figures to 2016 - see graphs) was as inexplicable and irresistible as an invisible gas, wafting over our borders, something about which no-one could do anything but submit as it wrecked the landscape, drove up housing prices, and congested the roads, jostling the inhabitants and competing for police attendance and scarce places in their schools and hospitals.

A good thing was that other people and myself were able to criticise this unnecessary acceptance of massive population growth without anyone trying to shut them up.

Wildlife

I also said how people concerned about wildlife could not accept this growth in light of how there was absolutely no serious provision of wildlife corridors and crossings so that, at the moment, it spells huge loss of habitat and cruelty, with animals pushed from their habitats onto roads or shot by hobby farmers, with the uncritical permission of the Department of Environment, Land, Water and Planning (DWELP.), which is supposed to protect wildlife.

Russell Joseph, Liberal Candidate for Nepean, who introduced the speaker and made some comments himself, responded to my raising the problem of wildlife by saying that Landcare and Port Philip Westernport Catchment Management Authority were attempting to make corridors, 'but that was, of course, a long term project', he added.

But wildlife are in crisis on the Peninsular due to the patchwork of intensifications, roads, and kangaroo fences. It is an emergency, the animals are running out of habitat and the situation is about to get much much worse if population growth continues, let alone accelerates. This is not something that can be solved in some far away time.

Aging population furphy

Jenny Warfe, Secretary of Sustainable Population Victoria and Tasmania (SPAVicTas), reminded keynote speaker Tim Smith that when John Howard presided over 80,000 migrant intake p.a. Australia was pretty prosperous. Under John Howard, net planned economic overseas immigrants went from about 80,000 to more than 250,000 and 300,000 due to changes Howard made. An implication was that Australia's GDP per capita has fallen as our population intake rate has increased.

Responding to some of the usual scaremongering about Australia's aging population, Ms Warfe described the ageing issue as a furphy, explaining that bringing more migrants will not help stem the ageing “time bomb” so often described. She observed that migrants age like the rest of us, so more migration only serves to eventually produce more and more ageing people. She added that stabilising the population would eventually solve the ageing “crisis” as the age bar chart/demographic, currently with the bulge towards the ageing end, would even out. There were some murmurs of agreement in the audience.

Employment and business costs

The problem of high unemployment on the Peninsula was alluded to by the speakers, and I responded by talking about how population growth inflates cost of resources as well as housing and rents. Business not only needs to pay for these itself, but it must also pay wages sufficient for its employees to afford housing, heating, etc. This makes Australian business uncompetitive with most overseas business (including, for comparison, that of continental Europe) due to our very high costs in land, housing, energy etc. See "Land and Rent Costs to Business make Australia uncompetitive".

Calculating Population Doubling Rates

The keynote speaker, Tim Smith, [1] had declared some pride in the Liberal Party's aiming for a policy to manage population that would take us all the way up to 2050. This led me to ask him if he was aware of the population doubling times of a population with Victoria's rate of 2.1% growth (actually 2.4 according to ABS 2016 figures. [2] He seemed to struggle with the concept itself and then admitted that he did not know. He asked me to tell him. I thought I detected some shock among the 70 people or so in the audience as well as, possibly, the speaker, when I said that at 2.1% growth Victoria's population would take about 35 yrs (in fact it would take 33.3). I added that population growth is being engineered upwards in most states, by soliciting mass economic immigration, so one had to take into consideration growth rates for the whole country.

I suggested that, rather than be proud that they were looking ahead to 2050, the Libs should be worried at the shortsightedness of their policy; they need to look much further ahead at the doubling rate consequences. They are preparing for a Victoria of 10m in 2050, but it would be 20m in 2080 or even sooner, still growing and much harder to stop.

The response was to ask for my details so they could contact me later. A person among the organisers later told me that 'between you and me' quite a few of the people involved on the task force would be quite pleased to have people attend the forums and talk about how to stop the population growth. It seemed that, for this person, the very idea was novel.

Farming

One small-time developer got up and said how none of the farms on the Mornington Peninsula (where the event was being held) made profits, intimating that something should replace them. And that we have to suck up population growth. He added that there was some attempt to make a wildlife crossing over Boneo Road, as if that would somehow compensate for the massive increases in traffic and loss of habitat.

Another man got up and gave examples of several farming operations which made good profits and employed lots of people.

Very few people from the audience spoke to support population growth.

Conclusion

People have been hypnotised into not questioning the whole growth thing. Most of them don't want the growth and only accept a search for management solutions because they think growth is inevitable. Many will be responsive to the concept that it is not.

Many of the people conducting these forums and most people attending these forums are unaware of what is driving population growth. They also have not considered population inertia and doubling rates. Giving them this information can only empower them.

People don't realise that the states dictate to the Feds on numbers. It is hard to know if politicians like Tim Smith are really so in the dark, but some may be. However Tim Smith should now be aware of https://liveinmelbourne.vic.gov.au/, (formerly http://liveinvictoria.org.au/)[3] because of what I said at the forum and later forwarded by email. Days later I ran into another Victorian MP associated with the Taskforce forums and when I mentioned that Victoria touts for immigrants and told her how, she shouted at me that I was 'bullshitting' her.

Victorian Population Policy Taskforce Regional Forums

Here are the ones still to come.

FRANKSTON
6-8pm
Monday 14 August
Frankston Mechanics Hall
1A Plowman Pl, Frankston VIC 3199
Contact: Ms Inga Peulich (03) 9772 1366

SEYMOUR
Friday 11 August 2017
Convenor: Ms Steph Ryan MP
Contact: [email protected] or phone 03 5762 1600

EASTERN METROPOLITAN – IVANHOE AND ELTHAM
Monday 14 August 2017, 10am – 12pm
Convenor: The Hon. Richard Dalla Riva MLC
Contact: [email protected] or phone 03 9803 0592

SOUTH EASTERN METROPOLITAN
Monday 14 August 2017, 6pm – 8pm
Convenor: Ms Inga Peulich MP
Contact: [email protected] or phone 03 9772 1366

BENTLEIGH
Tuesday 15 August 2017
Convenor: Ms Georgie Crozier MLC
Contact: [email protected] or phone 03 9555 4101

WONTHAGGI
Wednesday 16 August 2017
Convenor: Mr Brian Paynter MP
Contact: [email protected] or phone 03 5672 4755

NOTES

[1] Despite Tim's simple and somewhat naive presentation, his background would suggest more sophistication. Tim Smith's occupation prior to becoming a Member of Parliament for Kew electorate in Victoria, is listed as: Senior Consultant (Office of the Chief Executive Officer), PricewaterhouseCoopers (PwC). Consultant (Strategy and Operations) Deloitte. Assistant Adviser to The Hon. Bruce Billson MHR. Assistant Adviser to The Hon. Malcolm Turnbull MHR, Leader of the Opposition. Electorate Officer for The Hon. Michael O'Brien MLA, Shadow Minister for Gaming and Consumer Affairs. Researcher for The Rt Hon David Davis MP, Shadow Home Secretary (UK). He has a BA, MIntPol (Melb)and his other mentioned qualification is "Hansard Research Scholars Program (London School of Economics)." http://www.parliament.vic.gov.au/members/details/1743-mr-timothy-smith.

[2] 3101.0 - Australian Demographic Statistics, Dec 2016 at http://www.abs.gov.au/ausstats/[email protected]/mf/3101.0

[3] How Victoria touts for immigration: The site https://liveinmelbourne.vic.gov.au/ (until recently called https://www.liveinvictoria.vic.gov.au) presents videos to attract immigrants to Victoria. It makes no mention of the terrible problems that rapid and voluminous population growth are causing the state and which are the subject of harangs by State Premiers and the opposition (as in the Liberal Population Taskforce). "Some visas require you to have nomination from a state or territory government, or sponsorship from an eligible relative. The Victorian Government offers visa nomination to selected overseas skilled workers and business people with skill-sets and business acumen required in Victoria." These visas are https://liveinmelbourne.vic.gov.au/migrate/skilled-migration-visas/skilled-nominated-visa-subclass-190 for 'Skilled nominated visas' [until recently: "Skilled Nominated (190) visa"] and https://liveinmelbourne.vic.gov.au/visas-and-immigrating/skilled-visas/skilled-regional-visa-subclass-489 (for skilled visas and skilled regional visa subclass 489). [Formerly called: http://www.liveinvictoria.vic.gov.au/visas-and-immigrating/skilled-visas/skilled-regional-visa-subclass-489] The site, https://https://liveinmelbourne.vic.gov.au [formerly https://www.liveinvictoria.vic.gov.au] is a Victorian Government site and carries the Victorian Government logo.

Candobetter.net has only just heard of this inquiry which closes today. However the Secretary of the inquiry has been contacted and she indicated that if individuals write in to this address: [email protected] and request to make a late inquiry, stating who they are and how much time they might require, such as a week or two, permission will probably be granted. The inquiry seems to have been poorly publicised because a lot of people have only just found out due to an animal rescue group writing to various other groups and individuals to complain that there are only about 16 submissions. But it seems that very few people were aware of this inquiry. So, please consider making a submission. Here is the website address: and inside this article I have noted some of the terms plus a link to an e-form, although emailed subs are apparently also acceptable.

Inquiry into the RSPCA Victoria

“Avoid culling roos for development by planning wildlife corridors,” says Craig Thomson, AWPC’s new Wildlife Planning Officer. In the face of state planning avoidance of obligation towards wildlife, Mr Thomson and AWPC want to crowdfund the purchase of private land to preserve wildlife corridors from being fenced off by farmers or built over by suburbia. The situation is increasingly dire for kangaroos and koalas particularly. Please consider helping this initiative. Contact details at end of article.

On Monday 7 December 2015, the Australian Wildlife Protection Council (AWPC) announced its appointment of Mr Craig Thomson, of Wildlife Ecosystems Retention and Restoration, as their Wildlife Planning Officer.

"It's a great privilege to work with AWPC," said Mr Thomson. "Currently with land clearing for development, councils require ‘offsets’. But offsets very rarely consider what happens to displaced wildlife, except for 'managing' it, which is a euphemism for conducting 'cull' or 'fertility' programs.

Maryland Wilson, AWPC President, said she was shocked to read of Ian Temby's recent call to cull kangaroos ahead of development as the only option for roos displaced by Melbourne's expansion. ("Call for kangaroos to be culled along Melbourne's urban fringe,”by Simon Lauder, ABC, 30 Nov 2015).

"There is another non-violent solution," she said. "It is a scandal that we have suffered through a succession of planning documents for Melbourne, without any allocating land for habitat with interconnecting continuous wildlife corridors that would enable safe passage for native animals. They have also failed to provide more than a tiny handful of animal bridges and underpasses at significant points on roads where wildlife often cross. Kangaroos, koalas, and other wildlife are increasingly road accident victims. As Melbourne expands to accommodate its human population growth program, suburban development pushes them out onto roads. This is planning negligence. "

AWPC says it has repeatedly engaged with councils in devising detailed plans for wildlife corridors. To date, however, no state government has cooperated with these plans, despite obligations to protect wildlife under the Fauna and Flora Guarantee Act.

"Instead, we have been repeatedly stone-walled. The result is the carnage Mr Temby suggests can only be avoided through culls. AWPC will be seeking a meeting with the Andrews State Government to negotiate for wildlife corridors instead of culling," said President Maryland Wilson.

Mr Thomson spoke of an imminent campaign to buy land on the Mornington Peninsula through crowd-funding. The aim is to create a private land reserve system for a wildlife corridor between national parks to sustain wildlife in the future. He says the matter is urgent as suburban development and a recent spate of farm-fencing are blocking the kangaroos' natural behaviour on the Peninsula.

Mr Thomson added, "It is ironic that some farmers are paying a lot of money for services that kangaroos would provide for free. For instance, vineyards spend much time and money keeping grass and weeds down between the vines. But, if they took down the fences and let the kangaroos in, the roos would not eat the vines, but they would keep the grass short."

CONTACT: Mr Craig Thomson, Wildlife Planning Officer, AWPC: 0474651292; Maryland Wilson, President, AWPC: 61359788570

Victoria is still far from having a comprehensive, adequate and representative national park and conservation system, and most major threats to nature identified in past reviews are still very much with us – habitat loss and degradation, invasive species, harmful fire regimes, over-grazing, modified water flows. Precious habitat remnants are being bulldozed for urban expansion or roads.

This article also appears on the AWPC website.

Great Forest National Park needs your pledge.

Victoria is the most cleared state in Australia, populations of native birds and animals are in freefall, and less than 25% of our rivers and creeks are in good condition.

The Great Forest National Park proposes that Victorians create and add a new 355,000 hectares of protected forests to the existing 170,000 hectares of parks and protected areas in the Central Highlands of Victoria. The basis for this tenure change is weighed scientifically, socially and economically against 5 key reasons;

1. Conservation of near extinct wildlife and plants after Black Saturday and in light of future fire events.

2. Water catchments of Melbourne, LaTrobe and the Goulburn Murray systems. The largest area of clean water and catchment in Victoria. Food bowl and community security.

3. Tourism. This is Victoria's richest ecological asset, but these magnificent forests have not yet been included in a state plan to encourage tourism. Our rural towns want and need this boost to tourism.

4. Climate. These ash forests store more carbon per hectare than any other forest studied in the world. They sequester carbon, modulate the climate and can act as giant storage banks to absorb excess carbon if they are not logged. The financial opportunity in carbon credits is significant and can be paid directly to the state when a system is established federally.

5. Places of spiritual nourishment. These magnificent forests have been described as a 'keeping place' by the traditional owners, a place to secure the story of the land and places of spiritual nourishment that we pass on to future generations. There should be no price tag on the value nature brings to mental health and spiritual well-being.

The tallest flowering trees on Earth grow north-east of Melbourne. In their high canopies dwell owls, gliders and the tiny Leadbeater's (or Fairy) Possum. Victoria's precious and endangered faunal emblem lives only in these ash forests of the Central Highlands.

David Lindenmayer, from the Australian National University, is an ecologist and conservation biologist who has spent over 30 years studying the Mountain Ash Forest of Victoria.

‘There’s a little mixture of things that always want to have the last word. The Lyrebird is one and the Kookaburra is another and the Eastern Yellow Robin and the Pilot Bird are two others,’ he says.

(image: Eastern yellow robin)

‘The birds are calling less than in the morning, but still nevertheless calling, and they’re just confirming their territories before there's an extraordinary change in the light in this long dusk period,’ says Lindenmayer.

The Mountain Ash, and one of Australia’s most endangered mammals, the Leadbeater’s Possum, are threatened by ongoing clear-felling and bushfires.
The population of large old hollow-bearing trees has collapsed. These are a critical habitat for the animals that use them, including Leadbeater’s Possum. There is a high risk that the possums will become exinct in the next 20-40 years.

(image: The Wilderness Society)

(image source: The Wilderness Society)

Home to threatened species, including Victoria’s animal emblem - the Fairy Possum, the proposed park will also be a sanctuary, providing real and lasting protection to some of Victoria’s, and the world’s, rarest plant and animal species. Prominent environmentalists Tim Flannery and Bob Brown have lent their support to the campaign. Sir David Attenborough has weighed into the state election, backing a call for the creation of a Great Forest National Park to protect the state faunal emblem, the Leadbeater’s possum.

The environmentalist’s intervention comes as a survey found 89 per cent of Victorians support the creation of a new national park in the Yarra Ranges and Central Highlands.

Logging over many years had previously reduced the Leadbeater's possum down to a fraction of its original range and now only around one per cent of mountain ash forest is old growth. A new 'taskforce' attempts to negotiate the future of the logging industry in the central highlands of Victoria and the possible creation of the new national park, in light of the critical status of Leadbeater's Possums.

The state government — elected in November — has so far made no official commitment to the proposed 355,000-hectare Great Forest National Park, which would include both recreational areas and conservation zones.

https://www.facebook.com/GreatForestNP?fref=ts

The good news is that the Victorian Government has given its strongest indication yet that it is open to ending clearfelling and closing down the hardwood timber industry in key parts of Victoria's Central Highlands to prevent the extinction of the Leadbeater's Possum.

‘The time for further reviews and studies is over. The only thing that will save Leadbeater’s Possums from extinction is to immediately stop the clearfell logging of the forest it lives in,’ Greens Senator Rice said.

Join the Great Forest National Park Volunteer Campaign Team. Text 'GFNP volunteer' to 0428 029 437. http://wilderness.org.au/articles/great-forest-national-park#sthash.UHAmATbg.dpuf

Send Your message of Support:

Victoria's royal commission into family violence will focus on improving a system that is struggling to cope with the sheer volume of people who need help, the inquiry's head says.

Commissioner Marcia Neave said the year-long inquiry would examine how to better protect people, prevent violence and hold perpetrators to account.

Domestic violence is not the only thing in Victoria struggling with the "sheer volume of people" that need services.

(image:"20081123120727-violencia-de-genero" by Concha García Hernández - Licensed under CC BY-SA 3.0 via Wikimedia Commons)

At nearly 2% of population growth, this massive increase of over 100,000 new people each year is causing clashing waves and tremors, disruption a once dignified city, and peaceful State.

Victoria's Premier, Daniel Andrews, has vowed to jail family violence thugs, make intervention orders easier to get and enforce tough new laws to make women and children safe. These are bold words, and chest-thumping promises, but he will be hard-pressed in light of Victoria's pressure-cooker environment.

The dystopia of unemployment, the uselessness of searching for non-existent jobs, pressure on house prices and mortgages, cuts to education, and the stresses of having to cope with many changes and impacts of course causes violence and crime! There's no predictability, stability, assurances of a future, and pressures on individuals and families for survival.

Our population has grown from 4.4 million people (1994) to over 5.7 million by 2014, yet the numbers of people who deliver services on behalf of the Government has dropped from 48,359 to 29,568 over that 20 years. Thanks to heavy cutbacks by the Napthine government, there are now fewer workers servicing more Victorians!

People under pressure explode, or resort to drugs or alcohol to ease the pressure. The population of women who are homeless because of domestic and family violence is increasingly becoming a group with complex and multiple needs due to drug and alcohol dependency, mental health issues and disability.

Overloaded prisons and correctional services

The prison population in Victoria grew by more than 14 per cent between December 2012 and December 2013 and rose every month. The recidivism rate is based on the number of prisoners who return to jail, under sentence, within two years of release. Unpublished state government figures obtained by The Saturday Age reveal the recidivism rate for 2013-2014 is at a 10-year high of 40 per cent, up from a low of 34 per cent four years ago. Prisoner numbers have grown almost 40 per cent from 4350 in June 2009 to 6454 on January 16. The government's forecast prison population for June 2015 is 7169.

Urban sprawl and housing challenges

Melbourne's rapid expansion, and urban sprawl, means that families are separated by a gulf of distances, due to limited affordable housing. Instead of being able to settle close to family support, in the suburbs where people grew up, they are forced either to rent, or buy in far flung urban fringes, with little infrastructure, support services, and away from access to family connections.
People could be forced into rental properties, in transience, and nomadic existence due to rent costs and job availability. It's crumbles a sense of permanence and stability that fosters long term relationships.

Added to the mix is the "diversity" of peoples, with various values proportioned to women, and children. The rising number of homeless, of families and women, is the tip of the iceberg of those who are falling between the safety cracks in our society - based on greed for growth, at all costs.

Statement of Planning Policy No. 8 Is out-of-date, old-fashioned

First published 30 Oct 2014 by the Macedon Ranges Residents' Association (MRRA) on www.mrra.asn.au.

(30/10/14 - SP) MRRA: If the government now thinks SPP8 – the policy it promised to retain – is so out-of-date, so old-fashioned, it's the fault of the government which has had 4 years to fix it, and honour its election promise to put it in place as State policy. Red Alerts Say No To Suburbia Noticeboard When elected in 2010, the State government promised to protect Macedon Ranges by reconfirming the 40 year policy – Statement of Planning Policy No. 8, Macedon Ranges and Surrounds – as State planning policy.

Before, and many times since that election, the Minister for Planning has repeatedly publicly stated the government would deliver its promise and protect Macedon Ranges.

Last Tuesday (28/10/14), on ABC Radio 774 (Jon Faine show), the Minister for Planning revealed the State government will not keep its promise to protect Macedon Ranges with State policy unless it is re-elected at the State election, now four weeks away.

Listen to the Minister's response to a caller's questions by clicking on the link (starts at 21.57 minutes into the discussion):

https://soundcloud.com/774-abc-melbourne/matthew-guy-on-mornings-with-jon-faine-1 (right click and open in new tab)

The Minister additionally said (mirroring Macedon Ranges Council's argument) that Statement of Planning Policy No. 8 – Macedon Ranges and Surrounds (introduced by the the Hamer government in 1975) is out-of-date and old-fashioned. He said references obsolete planning schemes and policies, and it needs to be 'contemporised' – it couldn't be used in its current form as State policy.

Although Macedon Ranges Shire Council has produced a draft Localised Planning Statement which is not Statement of Planning Policy No. 8, and introduces different policy settings for the Shire, the Minister said Council had produced a document which fulfilled the government's commitment. He attributed the delay in introducing State policy to an "on-going blue" between the local community (i.e. MRRA) and Council, and pledged the State government would act as mediator in the next round of consultation, if re-elected, ensuring neither party took the lead.

When challenged that failure to deliver State policy and Statement of Planning Policy No. 8 is a broken promise, he told the caller "you need to have a conversation with your Council instead of blaming others for your own fights".

MRRA says:

See also: Issues that should be decided at the 29 November Victorian State elections (14/10/14).

On 18 November, the Melbourne Age reported in Greens campaigning hard on East West Link in Melbourne inner-city seats:

Ellen Sandell, Greens Melbourne candidate

"The Victorian Greens have pledged to continue to campaign against the East West Link in marginal seats despite Labor promising to scrap the project if elected. As the Greens aim to win a balance of power in the upcoming state election, Victorian Greens leader Greg Barber said the party was campaigning fiercely about the East West Link in a number of inner-city marginal seats. ... "In the hotly contested seat of Melbourne, Greens candidate Ellen Sandell criticised the opposition's stance on the East West Link.

Ms. Sandell reminded voters that the East-West Link was Labor's position in the first place and criticised Labor for effectively 'outsourcing' the decision to the courts rather than committing itself to scrap East-West Link

The Greens are contesting all 128 seats of both houses of the Victorian Parliament._{#fnGrVic1" id="txtGrVic1">1}

A shortcoming of this campaign and, indeed, the campaigns by many community groups opposed to road transport is that it fails to question why so many Victorians need to commute such long distances in the first place._{#fnGrVic2" id="txtGrVic2">2}

Greens' failure to address population growth imposed by both major parties

A more serious shortcoming is the complete failure to even address, let alone oppose, the Victorian government's program to increase Victoria's population by by several million by encouraging large numbers of overseas workers to move to Victoria. This is exemplified by its infamous Live in Victoria web-site. This will surely cause social and ecological catastrophe in Victoria if not stopped. Those who stand to gain by destroying Victoria's livability, are a small minority of Victorians – property speculators, land developers and sweat-shop factory owners.

Why the Greens, a reputedly pro-environment party, has nothing to say about this would mystify many.

Voters, not party officials, should allocate preferences

The report concludes:

"Mr Barber was tight lipped about preference deals and said the Greens would 'cross that bridge when we come to it'."

This may mean that the Victorian upper house ballot still uses the anti-democratic system used in federal Senate elections. With this system, if a voter chooses not to allocate preferences in the way officials have decided he/she is obliged to number every square. As only a minority of voters put themselves through this amount of trouble, the preferential component of the upper house vote, which decides how a substantial proportion of members are elected, is in the hands of party officials and not voters.

Possibly Mr Barber was just referring to "how-to vote" cards for the lower house. Whilst this is not as bad as the system has been for the upper house, it is a fallacy accepted by many voters that if they want to vote for a particular part, then they are obliged to follow all the preferences on that party's "How to vote card".

It would be of concern if either of the above less-than-democratic aspects of Victoria's voting system were acceptable to Mr Barber.

Footnote[s]

Victorian voters could on Saturday 29 November begin to take back their state Parliament from the vested interests that are now running Victoria. If presented with open, informed discussion there is every reason to hope that a far larger proportion of Victorians than in previous years will vote for good independent or small party candidates and not for either of the two major parties.

The policies listed below are much of what I would like to see from the new Victorian government after 29 November. I believe that, if presented with the policies listed below, most Victorians would support them or, if not at first, would after open debate and discussion. So this document is intended to be guide to Victorians as to which of the candidates to vote for on 29 November, depending on the candidates' response to my survey, which I intend to publish here in coming days._{#fnVElec1" id="txtVElec1"> 1}

If you support these policies, and you know of a candidate in your electorate who also supports these polices, please consider offering to help him/her. Alternatively, if there is no candidate who supports these policies standing in your electorate or upper house region, the why not consider nominating yourself?_{#fnVElec2" id="txtVElec2"> 2}

The policies

More government participation in the economy

#VicElecPolicy1" id="VicElecPolicy1">1. No privatisation of any asset in which large numbers of Victorians have a stake, for example the Port of Melbourne._{#fnVElec3" id="txtVElec3"> 3} No privatisation of public buildings and public land. As the means to do so become available, reverse privatisations which have occurred since the time of the Kirner Labor Government in the early 1990's. Conduct a pubic audit of these privatisations.

#VicElecPolicy2" id="VicElecPolicy2">2. Expand the size of state government work force. The goal is for each Victorian who needs work to be offered work in a occupation which provides useful services to the community and which matches his/her interests and has on-the-job training and career structure. Private employers to be encouraged to do likewise.

#VicElecPolicy3" id="VicElecPolicy3">3. Public Bank of Victoria to be established. It is to be run like the Bank of North Dakota in accordance with the principles of the United States Public Banking Institute._{#fnVElec4" id="txtVElec4"> 4}

Full employment in secure and fulfilling occupations

#VicElecPolicy4" id="VicElecPolicy4">4. Oppose high immigration and dismantle the Live in Victoria website._{#fnVElec5" id="txtVElec5"> 5}

#VicElecPolicy5" id="VicElecPolicy5">5. No section 457 visas where there are local tradespersons. Employers must prove that they have attempted to train local workers before they are allowed to import new workers with 457 visas.

#VicElecPolicy6" id="VicElecPolicy6">6. Abolish sweat-shops in which illegal foreign workers are exploited. Employers found to have illegally exploited foreign workers in such factories to be prosecuted and jailed. Any public officer found to have been complicit in these sweatshops to also be prosecuted and jailed.

#VicElecPolicy7" id="VicElecPolicy7">7. Immediate reduction of working hours to 35 hours_{#fnVElec6" id="txtVElec6"> 6} with further reductions in the near future.

#VicElecPolicy8" id="VicElecPolicy8">8. Flexible part-time working hours to be offered to government workers who wish to work less than a full week's work._{#fnVElec7" id="txtVElec7"> 7} Private employers to be encouraged to do likewise.

#VicElecPolicy9" id="VicElecPolicy9">9. Create government enterprises to compete with private business. This will provide incentives for privately owned business better services and charge less._{#fnVElec8" id="txtVElec8"> 8} Government enterprises to include: real estate, funerals, car dealerships, equipment hire and land development.

#VicElecPolicy10" id="VicElecPolicy10">10. Re-build Australian manufacturing in Victoria._{#fnVElec9" id="txtVElec9"> 9} The government to plan the rebuilding of manufacturing with the private sector. Protective tariffs to be imposed to protect manufactured items as agreed to in the plan.

Effective town planning

#VicElecPolicy11" id="VicElecPolicy11">11. Reduction of commute times through better town planning and better public transport._{#fnVElec10" id="txtVElec10">10}

#VicElecPolicy12" id="VicElecPolicy12">12. End approval for high rise apartments._{#fnVElec11" id="txtVElec11">11} At most, allow medium density housing of heights of no more than 3 stories close to parkland, bushland, shops, schools and other amenities.

#VicElecPolicy13" id="VicElecPolicy13">13. Preserve spaces for community activities._{#fnVElec12" id="txtVElec12">12} Re-establish community spaces where they don't exist.

#VicElecPolicy14" id="VicElecPolicy14">14. Public liability insurance funding to be established for community events as done in NSW.

#VicElecPolicy15" id="VicElecPolicy15">15. Secure shelter to be provided as a right._{#fnVElec13" id="txtVElec13">13}

Reduce waste, make Victoria sustainable

#VicElecPolicy16" id="VicElecPolicy16">16. No over-packaging, demand effective recycling._{#fnVElec14" id="txtVElec14">14}

Computers, information technology and the Internet

#VicElecPolicy17" id="VicElecPolicy17">17. Free open source software_{#fnVElec15" id="txtVElec15">15} to be used in all government departments, statuary authorities, TAFE colleges and schools. Private companies and institutions to be encouraged to do likewise. The Victorian government to make generous financial contributions to the providers of open-source software.

#VicElecPolicy18" id="VicElecPolicy18">18. Establish a free social network on the Internet as an alternative to Facebook, Google and Twitter. That social network is to respect the privacy of its users and be free, transparently run and without commercial advertising._{#fnVElec16" id="txtVElec16">16}

Open Government

#VicElecPolicy19" id="VicElecPolicy19">19. End government secrecy._{#fnVElec17" id="txtVElec17">17}

#VicElecPolicy20" id="VicElecPolicy20">20. No "commercial in confidence" contracts_{#fnVElec18" id="txtVElec18">18}.

Consumer rights

#VicElecPolicy21" id="VicElecPolicy21">21. Outlaw built-in obsolescence. Manufacturers and importers of products with built-in obsolescence to be prosecuted._{#fnVElec19" id="txtVElec19">19}

#VicElecPolicy22" id="VicElecPolicy22">22. Encourage food self-sufficiency. Wherever possible, make land available to local communities so that they can emulate extant local initiatives such as Down's Estate at Seaford Wetlands. Available members of the Down's Estate group and others with expertise to be hired by the government to instruct other communities.

Biodiversity protection and respect for other species

#VicElecPolicy23" id="VicElecPolicy23">23. Preserve remaining native flora and fauna. Re-vegetate urban areas to provide additional living space for endangered wildlife.

#VicElecPolicy24" id="VicElecPolicy24">24. Avoid disturbance of established wildlife populations so that their social organisation and local biofeedback is preserved since this will tend to regulate their population in line with territorial and migratory rules

#VicElecPolicy25" id="VicElecPolicy25">25. Outlaw the harassment of possums, such as the banding of palm trees with bands of steel by the St Kilda Council to prevent possums being able to climb the trees.

#VicElecPolicy26" id="VicElecPolicy26">26. Protect wildlife with strategic underpasses and overpasses on freeways. To protect wildlife, these are to be mandatory on all new roads and retrofitted to older roads within 10 km of green spaces in order to maintain migratory pathways.

Improving the health of Ordinary Victorians

#VicElecPolicy27" id="VicElecPolicy27">27. Fund research to determine if processed food
bought from food retailers is harmful to our health_{#fnVElec20" id="txtVElec20">20}

#VicElecPolicy28" id="VicElecPolicy28">28. Government employees to share office duties with outside manual workers to remove health hazards caused by long hours of physical inactivity_{#fnVElec21" id="txtVElec21">21}, Private employers to be encouraged to do the same for their workers.

Protection of civil liberties, freedom of speech

#VicElecPolicy29" id="VicElecPolicy29">29. Outlaw indiscriminate telecommunications surveillance_{#fnVElec22" id="txtVElec22">22} of Victorians as revealed by Julian Assange and Edward Snowden and others.

#VicElecPolicy30" id="VicElecPolicy30">30. Acknowledge the debt of gratitude that the Victorian people owe to fellow Victorian Julian Assange and protect him from unjust persecution._{#fnVElec23" id="txtVElec23">23}

#VicElecPolicy31" id="VicElecPolicy31">31. Acknowledge the debt of gratitude that the Victorian people owe to Edward Snowden._{#fnVElec24" id="txtVElec24">24}

About the author

I stood in the 2009 Queensland state treasurer in the seat of Mount Coot-tha against then Treasurer Andrew Fraser. (prior to that on 15 March 2008, I had also stood against the current Queensland Premier Campbell Newman for Lord Mayor of Brisbane.) Articles about that election and my campaign can be found here. The reason I stood was I wanted to stop the further privatisation of Queensland's public assets which had started under the previous premier Peter Beattie. Amongst other assests Beattie privatised the State Government Insurance (SGIO - as it was then know, it is now known as 'Suncorp') and the Golden Casket lottery corpration, neither with any electoral mandate. I feared that then Premier Anna Bligh planned to privatise more public assets and that no other candidate was going to raise the issue. Sadly, I was right about both concerns (although one member of the Queensland, Dorothy Pratt, the independent member for Nanango until she retired in 2012 spoke, in Parliament against privatisation).

Whilst the Greens had stated their opposition to privatisation, they did not raise that issue during the election campaign as far as I was aware. Had they done so, they would almost certainly have a received a much better vote and considerably improved the prospects for success of the subsequent campaign against privatisation.

After the election Queensland Premier Anna Bligh claimed that she had suddenly discovered that debts owed by the Queensland Government and that necessary public expenditure on government programs made privatisation of a number of assets necessary. These assets included:

• Queensland Motorways Limited (Operating the Gateway Bridge and Logan Motorway tolling systems);
• The Port of Brisbane Authority;
• Forestry Plantations Queensland;
• Abbot Point Coal Terminal; and
• Coal carrying rail lines, currently owned by Queensland Rail (QR Passenger services will remain nationalised).

Sadly, I had been injured almost fatally on 10 May 2010, when a four wheel drive ran into me on my bicycle on my way to work. I was lucky not to be killed. My brain was concussed and I suffered #js">diffuse axonal brain damage. Consequently I am not able to work as effectively as I once could (although people tell me that my intellect, if not my memory, coordination and stamina, is about as good as it was before my injury).

Because I was disabled, I was not able to stand in the Australian Federal Elections of 21 August 2010 and the Queensland state elections of 24 March 2012. If I had, I would surely have got a much higher vote in both.

As a result of public outrage at Premier Bligh's asset sell-off, the Labor Party was routed by Liberal/National leader Campbell Newman in the 2012 state elections. Since then, contrary to the clear wishes of Queenslanders, Queensland Premier Campbell Newman is now proceeding with his own program of yet more privatisations.

This sad experience demonstrates that neither of the major parties offer any real alternative to voters, who will have to find an alternative elsewhere.

Footnotes